The brand association base: A conceptual model for strategically leveraging partner brand equity

Received (in revised form): 7th June, 2004

HENRIK UGGLA
is a researcher and a consultant within the eld of brand management. He received his BA in cognitive psychology and his PhD in marketing from Stockholm University. His current research interests cover brand leverage and brand architecture. He has published four books and has contributed book chapters. He lectures globally on new trends in brand management.

Abstract
This paper introduces a conceptual framework for managing the transfer of meaning between brands using a structured and strategic approach. A model is introduced that distinguishes between four components: the leader brand, the partner brand, institutional associations and the customers image of the brand. An overview of the model is presented and then each component of the model and the paths of transfer of meaning to and from brands are described in greater detail. Finally, issues related to leader and partner brand architecture are presented and a research-derived checklist for leader brand territory expansion is suggested.

INTRODUCTION
The present paper offers a theoretical and pragmatic response to concerns raised by an international authority on strategic brand management about the necessity of obtaining a greater understanding of how meaning transfers to and from brands:1
In what ways do the images of country of origin or country of brand, celebrity spokespeople or retail store, etc, change or supplement the image of a brand? At the same time, it is important to understand how the meaning of a brand transfers to other brands, products etc.

Henrik Uggla KTH Industrial Economics and Management, Lindstedtsva gen 30, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden. Tel: 46 8 790 8734 E-mail: henrikuggla@indek.kth.se

Obtaining a greater understanding of how meaning transfers to and from brands is envisioned as one of ve research imperatives for strategic brand management in the future. Moreover, this paper presents ideas relevant to the selection of a value chain partner brand that enables the brand to extend

past its traditional competencies.2 The ideas developed in the present paper also partially contribute to developing more rened models of specic application areas in branding, particularly co-branding, ingredient branding and complex brand architecture in relation to a strategic design of brand identity and brand equity systems. Co-branding, in which key dimensions of a partner brand are incorporated into a leader brand strategy, is becoming increasingly popular among marketers and brand managers. The phenomenon is a good example of a broader marketing trend, reecting strategic alliances between brands. Several powerful forces underpin this new development. The pressures to increase the effectiveness of marketing spend, combined with an increased stress on the brand to accelerate and enhance cash ows, converge to the end of creating shareholder value.3
105

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

UGGLA

A basic distinction within the larger eld of brand collaboration can be made between ingredient branding, in which key attributes are incorporated into another brand as ingredients (for example, ECCO shoes with GORETEX), ingredient co-branding (Aunt Jemima cookies with Sun-Maid raisins), and more symmetrical co-branding arrangements, such as in the cobranding effort between Siemens and Porsche Design concerning electronic kitchen appliances (for example, a coffee maker and a kettle). The former strategy, ingredient branding, reinforces a single attribute through the presence of a partner brand; however, the latter strategy, co-branding, represents a reciprocal commitment in terms of calibration of core values, the identication of discrepancies between attribute proles and identication of a possible new position for the co-brand. Despite the increasing interest in brand collaboration strategy among theoreticians and brand strategists, the area has been overtly concerned with elementaristic distinctions and narrow problems reecting a kind of marketing myopia towards this important and growing subject area. Consequently, holistic research aimed at unfolding the strategic links and transfer of meaning between brands has been largely ignored.

FINDINGS FROM RESEARCH Transfer of meaning and the importance of fit in brand extension and co-branding
Both brand extension and co-branding represent an attempt to stretch a brands territory beyond its core and leverage established brand equity. Despite this
106

shared strategic intention, however, the t bases of co-branding and brand extensions diverge in important respects. (Fit refers to the level of psychological congruency between a brand and a category, or between two brands.) The brand extension literature has explored possible bases of t when a brand enters into a new product category. Brand extension studies have distinguished three bases of t, namely, complement, substitute and transfer of skill between the original brand and the extension product. Studies also found interactive effects that predict the success of brand extension with different variables. For example, host brand quality is not enough to create a successful brand extension it must interact with t to become successfully evaluated by consumers.4 The studies further show that a brand can broaden its own mission and meaning over time using a planned sequence of extensions into new categories.5 Tauber6 developed two criteria for brand extensions: t and leverage between the host brand and new product categories. He views t as a natural link that is established between the brand and the new product, and leverage as the differentiating attribute or benet in the new category. Brand extension implies a transfer of meaning between brand and category, whereas a brand alliance implies a conjunction and elaboration of meaning from brand to brand with category meanings underneath the involved brands. Conceptually, it is important to distinguish brand extension t from brand alliance t. Contrary to the brand extension situation, there is no transferability of manufacturing skills involved in a brand alliance. This is because skill is

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE

embodied in the partner brand associations that are transferred.7 In other words, the core competence belongs to each brand involved in the alliance and is not judged or evaluated by the consumer on a brand-to-category basis. Instead, the skill is implicitly embedded in the brand identity of each partner in a co-branding or ingredient branding design. In a brand alliance context, there is a brand t and a category t. Brand t involves a psychosocial and connotative dimension. For example, if the conservative personality of Mercedes can be complemented through the exciting and dynamic personality offered by Swatch, what emerges is a form of complementary brand t. In comparison, if sauce as a category ts with rice, there is a category t, such as in the case of the Uncle Bens brand of rice. Co-branding is based on the t between the brands and the t between the emerging product to each original brand (for example the t of Ha agenDazs Baileys brand to Ha agen-Dazs ice cream and Baileys liqueur). In a study exploring the bases of t within co-branding, it was found that the criteria most often used in an evaluation of t are emotional brand t, product t, functional brand t and brand personality t.8

Sources of equity in brand collaboration

In general, brand equity is comprised of four main categories of asset: brand awareness, perceived quality, brand associations and brand loyalty.9 From a brand knowledge perspective, brand associations can be further classied by type, favourability, strength and uniqueness.10 In brand leveraging, secondary sources of brand

equity include other brands, companies, countries, channels of distribution, characters, spokespersons, events and other third-party sources. In linking the brand to another entity, awareness, meaningfulness and transferability of knowledge of the entity are important in predicting the extent of leverage that can be created.11 A model of brand equity sharing in a co-branding context suggests four levels with increasing levels of shared value creation.12 Reach/awareness co-branding refers to collaboration where a partner increases awareness by quickly gaining access to the others customer base (for example, the co-branding of the Diners Club International credit card with Scandinavian Airlines). Valuesendorsement co-branding refers to cooperation where partners align their brand values in the customers mind (Le Cordon Bleu French culinary academy endorsing the Tefal Integral range of cookware). The third level identifies a branded physical component in the offering for example, the Intel microchip in personal computers (also GORE-TEX fabrics in apparel and Nutrasweet artificial sweetener in soft drinks). Complementary competence co-branding finally refers to two powerful and complementary brands that combine to produce a new product, based on awareness, values and ingredients. Sony and Ericsson have produced Sony Ericsson mobile telephones. In corporate co-branding, four sources of brand equity have therefore been identified.13 Access to the brand strategy and associations of the cobranding partner, alignment of corporate brand values, an association with the partners marketing com107

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

UGGLA

Institutional associations

Image transfer

Association base

Identity transfer

Partner brand Partner category Customer brand image

Leader brand Leader category

Figure 1

The brand association base with image and identity transfer between brands

munications and, finally, the reach of the corporate co-brand offer equity. From this overview of the bases of t in brand extension and co-branding, and the sources of brand equity, a new strategic model is introduced for the design of brand alliances that can help to expand a brands territory through a transfer of meaning between brands or between a brand and a product category. This paper rst presents a denition of the brand association base, then describes the model and concludes by explaining the different barriers to and pathways of meaning transfer in the model.

meaning for the brand (image) and value (equity).

This is shown in Figure 1. Table 1 characterises the different associations. These are discussed below.

The leader brand

The leader brand is the most downstream14 brand in a brand alliance context, it is the primary brand, associated with a secondary brand.15 The co-brand comprising ECCO shoes and GORE-TEX fabric consists of a leader brand (ECCO) and a partner brand (GORE-TEX). Four important criteria delimit and dene the leader brand in a brand alliance or co-branding context: it is the category driver, it has control over the marketing and distribution system, it has status as a modied brand, and is the owner of a customer base. For example, ECCO sells quality shoes (category) in its own stores (marketing

THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE

The brand association base can be dened in the following way:
The brand associations managed by a leader brand (category), extended through identity transfer or leveraged through image transfer via partner brands (categories) and/or institutional associations that contribute in a positive/negative way to customer-derived
108

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE

Table 1 Characterisation of different associations Type of association character Category relation Leader brand associations Dening the product/service category Partner brand associations Modifying the leader brands product/service category attributes Institutional associations Endorsing leader and partner categories through cultural meaning Socio-culturally dened, based on cultural conventions Secondary Permeate the value chain Index Oxford University (scientic source associations; heritage)

Type of meaning

Commercial

Commercial

Source of brand equity Position in the value chain Semiotic status Empirical example

Primary The most downmarket brand Symbol SEIKO Instruments (SEIKO Oxford English Spellchecker)

Secondary The most upmarket brand Icon Oxford University Press (digital dictionary content)

and distribution); the GORE-TEX ingredient brand modies the ECCO line of shoes for the segment of waterproof shoes (modier brand), and ECCO owns a customer base of potential shoe buyers. In the cobranding architecture of the Ford Explorer Eddie Bauer Edition, Ford Explorer is the leader brand that is modied up-market through the Eddie Bauer partner brand. In this case, the leader brand reaches up to a higher market segment through the premium associations transferred through the partner brand. In England, Seiko is a leader brand in relation to Oxford University Press. Seiko and Oxford University Press have developed a digital crossword solver that is marketed by Seiko through its consumer products website. In this case Oxford University Press is the contentproviding co-brand. In the service sector, the leader brands often appear as organisers of

meaning from partner brands. A sign of this strategic direction is that most theme parks now have their own partner brand managers that develop platforms and conditions for brand alliances. Universal Studios has established relations with a number of partners. An important strategic consideration for the leader brand relates to how it should be positioned in relation to its partners. The roles and positions of partner brands will depend upon the more specic product market context where these partners appear. In the case of Universal Studios, a basic distinction has been created between partners, sponsors and supplier brands. Partner, sponsor and supplier brands differ in their visibility in the graphic portfolio, in marketing communication and the amount of space devoted to them in the theme parks. The leader brand connects to the larger association base through identity transfer. An important strategic con109

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

UGGLA

Figure 2

Bianchi and Ducati mountain bike (reprinted with permission from Cycleurope).

sideration for the leader brand relates to how much of the brand should be transparent in relation to partners, and how brands should be co-positioned in a brand alliance effort. In a distributionled brand alliance, the leader brand may be used as an umbrella and a portal. For example, Togos sandwiches serves as an umbrella leader brand in the multi-unit franchising alliance with Dunkin Donuts and Baskin-Robbins ice cream. In product co-branding, the positioning of the leader brand may be more balanced. The co-brand Bianchi-Ducati mountain bike represents a visible balance between the leader brand (Bianchi) and the partner brand (Ducati); see Figure 2.

The partner brand

Partner brand associations are dened here as associations secondary to the identity and more immediate territory of the leader brand. There is an afnity between partner brand association and Kevin Lane Kellers concept of secondary brand associations, dened by him as brand associations that could be leveraged from secondary sources outside the brands own identity.16 These brands are associated secondary brands that are linked to
110

leader brands. Partner brands can be components, products, people or even places with desirable reputations and high levels of brand awareness. Partner brands are often linked downstream in the value chain to leader brands (see Figure 3). Intel processors, GORE-TEX fabrics, Nutrasweet articial sweetener, Dupont Supplex and LYCRA are ingredient partner brands that cannot be bought outside the leader brand offering.17 Nonetheless, partner brands can also be manufacturers brands aligned downstream in certain marketing contexts. Indian Oil is partner brand to the VISA leader brand in a co-branded credit card in India. Chiquita is a partner brand to the Beechnut leader brand in its baby food line, and Baileys Original Irish Cream is a partner brand to Ha agen18 Dazs ice cream. More specically, Chiquita and Baileys are ingredient co-brands brands positioned as ingredients but in contrast to GORE-TEX and Intel, these brands can be bought outside the immediate co-branding context. Strong celebrity endorsers such as Cindy Crawford, Michael Jordan and Ronaldo can also be positioned as partner brands. Partner brands contribute brand equity to the dominant leader brand

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE

Figure 3 GORE-TEX: a partner brand that transfers its image to leading manufacturers brands (reprinted with permission of Peak Performance Scandinavia).

and its association base using a transfer of meaning through asymmetrical or symmetrical collaboration. In an asymmetrical collaboration, one brand is generally more dominant than the other in all respects. In contrast, symmetrical collaboration refers to a more balanced relationship between the partner and leader brand. In some cases, partner brand associations become so strong and important as drivers for the end consumers decision that they become a natural part of the overarching brand structure of the leader brand and transform into a partner sub-brand. For instance, the Michael Jordan partner brand had that character in relation to Nike (Nike Air Jordan) and Eddie Bauer has a similar relationship to Ford Explorer.19

Institutional associations
Institutions are establishments with a deep societal or cultural meaning. The church and the university are institutions; marriage and art are two other examples. Institutional associations are subtle cultural associations without

explicit commercial character. These associations are the outcome of culturally embedded meaning that can be transformed into meaning and value for a specic brand. An institutional association denotes an association that has meaning and recognition in a given cultural context. These are powerful associations for which meaning is determined by institutional rules and relations.20 A key feature of this kind of association is that because they are already embedded in a larger surrounding context and culture, they also have assumed a certain amount of meaning. When this cultural and contextspecic attribution structure becomes linked to the brand resource, it can be transformed into a source of real brand value (ie customer-based brand equity). A strategy based on institutionalised associations aims to appropriate a given cultural meaning or value structure and internalise it into strategy. In India, Ponds is a household brand with millions of customers. The brand used the concept of a Ponds Institution and linked itself to technology and research
111

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

UGGLA

Figure 4 The shield, an institutional symbol for Oxford University and Oxford University Press (reprinted by permission of Oxford University and Oxford University Press).

associations in an effort to reposition the brand for the skincare market.21 Artists such as Andy Warhol facilitated a transfer of institutional associations from art to consumer brands such as CocaCola and Campbells Soup.22 A property or event can have a host of institutional associations; for example, bowling is considered downmarket, while opera is considered esoteric and upmarket, with subtle institutional associations.23 A cause can have institutional associations and, by linking a brand to a cause, the brand can appear as sincere and socially responsible. Avons breast cancer crusade is one example of this strategy.24 A sharp distinction needs to be drawn between institutional associations and institutional brand associations. The Oxford University shield is a symbol of the universitys heritage and its association with knowledge and education (institutional association).
112

Seiko UK uses the shield on the package of its Oxford English Spellchecker, and thereby creates an institutional brand association (see Figure 4). When brands connect to institutions, institutional brand associations are created that can create legitimacy for the brand. Institutional associations can reside in a qualication mark, such as Fairtrade. A qualication mark is a collective non-commercial brand that guarantees the socially responsible way in which a product has been produced; it can provide great and legitimate associations that signal social responsibility.25

Brand image
The customer derives perceived equity from one or more elements related to the brands sharing the same association base. The brand knowledge changes when a brand becomes linked to another brand or entity.26 There is

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE

Figure 5

Partner brand associations from the consumer perspective

a difference in brand image between CocaCola viewed as an individual soft drink brand and as part of the conjunction of rum and CocaCola. In the rst instance, CocaCola is viewed as an independent soft drink brand; in the brand constellation with rum it is perceived as a mixer and an ingredient. In a similar manner, the dual brand Sony Ericsson is a co-driver brand structure27 that implies other connotations than Sony and Ericsson viewed as distinct entities. From an individual consumers brand image perspective, the brand image crafted from the brand association base will consist of a combined meaning where a brand may be a symbol, an icon or an index,28 as shown in Figure 5. A symbol is an arbitrary sign based upon convention. Consumers have become used to the idea that ECCO represents shoes and that Virgin represents a boundary-spanning brand from music to airlines to wine. Nike is a

symbol for sports fashion. An index represents an inherent existential link between the brand and the product. Michael Jordan was an index for Nike basketball shoes, endorsing certain brand values such as winning and sports elitism. An icon, nally, is based on similarity and looks like its object. From a brand image perspective, the leader brand will usually be perceived as a symbol, the partner brand as an icon and institutional associations as index or endorsing brands.29 A typical brand image with ECCO and GORETEX may be GORE-TEX as an index for waterproof shoes (guaranteed to keep you dry) and ECCO as a symbol for functional quality shoes with a characteristic design. Consumer brand image can change, however. For some market segments in Scandinavia, GORE-TEX has transformed from icon to index to symbol (my GORETEX jacket from Peak Performance). Recent brand tracking also indicates
113

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

UGGLA

Table 2 Benets from collaboration for leader and partner brands Leader brand Functional benets Extend brand territory through indirect extension Reinforce and endorse an isolated attribute and benet Reduce competitive advantage of the market leader Create stronger associations with quality Capitalise on a core competence Reinforce emotional benets through image transfer of functional or symbolic benets Image transfer of design and selfexpression Use partner as a silver bullet brand Partner brand Extend to new categories Leverage channel equity Expand the customer base Create more usage Capitalise on brand awareness

Emotional benets

Extend the value proposition Create a deeper brand personality

Symbolic benets

Image transfer of end-user and usage imagery from the leader brand customer base

stronger purchase intent for GORETEX than for its category leading brands, such as Adidas, Nike, Levis and ECCO,30 although GORE-TEX cannot be bought outside the context of these brands. Furthermore, a symbol such as Sony may be perceived as an index (for digital content and camera technology) in relation to Ericsson.

BENEFITS WITH BRAND COLLABORATION

From a nancial perspective, successful brand collaboration can accelerate and enhance cash ow and increase shareholder value. Strategic brand alliances and cross-promotions can accelerate cash ows through penetration of multiple customer bases and increased responses to marketing activities.31 The essence of co-branding is that both partners gain access to the others customer base. Cooperation that involves sharing a brand association base enables rms to lower costs by leveraging established brand equity, increase revenues by reaching new
114

markets, and avoid the xed costs of creating a new brand.32 Beyond nancial incentives, partners can extend and reinforce their value proposition through brand collaboration. A distinction can be made between functional, emotional and symbolic reasons for collaboration (Table 2). In other words, the leader or partner brand can mirror or complement its value proposition through image transfer from a partner brand in the surrounding environment. These benets will now be explored from the perspective of the parties involved in a brand leverage effort through the brand association base ie the leader brand and the partner brand.

Functional benefits
The leader brand can extend its own brand territory indirectly towards the end users by way of collaboration; a stronger attribute prole can sometimes be created together with a partner brand than would otherwise be possible if the leader brand had extended

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE

into this new territory by itself.33 Furthermore, the leader brand can reinforce the functional dimension of its value proposition through a single attribute or benet incorporated through image transfer from a partner brand. In this way, the leader brand STAY-IN-PLACE sports bra capitalises on the stretch and anti-perspiration attributes offered through the partner brand DuPont Supplex. These incorporated functional benets may be perceived as an intrinsic part of the brand identity of the leader brand to a certain group of customers in the growing and dynamic tness and aerobics segment of the market. This strategy of collaboration involves core product complementarity that can help the leader brand to reach in to achieve greater market share in its current target market.34 Moreover, a leader brand can differentiate its own position through a strong branded ingredient offered by a partner brand and offset some of the competitive advantage of other brands with similar positioning. A brand of cookies can use a strong manufacturers brand of chocolate or raisins in a similar way, or a brand of mountain bikes (for example, Decathlon mountain bikes) can use the Shimano partner brand to secure and isolate a unique association with quality, which spills over to the leader brand. Finally, the leader brand can nd a strong strategic advantage and functional incentive in capitalising on a core competency,35 and thereby borrow needed expertise and brand equity that it does not possess in its own right. The partner brand can leverage the channel equity of leader brands in an effort to move downstream; it can capitalise on leader brand awareness and extend into new

categories. Every time the GORETEX fabric enters into a new category, it also represents an extension for the brand and the GORE-TEX black square logo is positioned in relation to the leader brand.

Emotional and symbolic benefits

A leader brand can reinforce or borrow symbolic benets through a transfer of design and self-expressive associations from the partner brand. In the car industry, Ford Explorer has transferred symbolic brand associations from the Eddie Bauer partner brand36 and leveraged the emotional and design-oriented associations. The Eddie Bauer brand has outsold other versions of the Explorer costing considerably less. A leader brand can sometimes use a partner brand as a silver bullet brand. A silver bullet brand is a brand with the capacity of changing or modifying consumers perception of the dominant leader brand. There is often a strong intrinsic symbolic component that spills over to the leader brand in this case. The silver bullet partner brand can help to revitalise and energise the brand identity of the leader brand through strong symbolic associations. A strongly emotional or symbolic partner brand can also help the leader brand to escape a product category trap. The co-branding between Gorenje and Pininfarina provides an excellent example of this logic of leveraging the symbolic benets of a partner brand and using it as a silver bullet brand. Gorenje and Pininfarina have introduced a range of ovens in stainless steel. Gorenje represents function and technology, Pininfarina represents
115

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

UGGLA

emotion and a symbolic heritage with Italian design. Both the brands contributed to the alliance and created a better attribute prole than Gorenje as a leader brand or Pininfarina as a partner brand could have done by direct extension. The partner brand can extend its value proposition downstream and create and add depth to its brand personality. It can also transfer some of the user and usage imagery from the leader brand. For example, the Pininfarina brand was previously only associated with cars, but has now broadened its position through association with several brands in different product categories.

endorsers and living brands are subject to risks in this respect. In Sweden, the highly successful sprinter Ludmila Enqvist was strongly connected to a major national cereal brand, AXA. In fact she had her own sub-brand in a larger endorsement line, AXA-Ludmila breakfast cereal. After getting caught for steroid abuse, she was looked upon more as a liability for the brand than as a brand asset.

Confused positioning and lost focus in target groups

The wrong selection of partner brands can lead to immediate image losses for the brands involved. Two incompatible personalities can erode associations for each of the brands identities, with the end result of confused positioning for one of the partner brands. Brand personalities must have both points of parity and points of difference in order to make up a meaningful co-branding arrangement.37 There can also be a loss of distinctive features for one of the partner brands.

RISKS OF USING THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE MODEL

The potential disadvantages of brand collaboration are also reected in the brand association base model. Brands that choose to collaborate and cross their natural boundaries expose themselves to risks in four areas: loss of control; confused positioning and lost focus in target groups; image dilution through overexposure; and less leverage points and potential in the future.

Image dilution through overexposure

Too much collaboration can lead to less impact from the image-transfer process to the leader brand. If the brand has entered into many different collaborations and has a whole portfolio of partners, that may inhibit the image-transfer process between the brands. This can be a problem both for ordinary brands and celebrity endorsers or living brands. Think of brand endorsers such as Michael Jordan or Andre Agassi in the 1980s and how large their partner brand portfolios were. Even though more collaboration can make the brand even

Loss of control
The most obvious risk with brand leveraging is related to control and the loss of control over the brands identity, core values and associations. In every instance where brands collaborate, there is a potential loss of control over the brand to another party. Brands positioning and identity can change over time, and some brands are more vulnerable to brand leveraging than others. Particularly, celebrity
116

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE

better recognised and stronger in terms of higher absolute levels of brand awareness, the uniqueness and differentiation of the association may be lost.

Less leverage points in the future

When a brand is leveraged in combination with another brand, some of its leveraging potential for the future may be pre-empted. The reason for this is simple: if sources of brand equity are borrowed rather than built, the same sources cannot be leveraged in the future. What is built in terms of brand equity today can be leveraged and, to a certain extent, controlled by the rm tomorrow. In contrast, brand resources that are borrowed do not transfer their ownership to the leader brand. The competence and skill provided by the partner brand will instead be attributed back to that brand in the future. When the needed expertise is borrowed or bought it is not owned, and therefore not an eternal reputation asset for the company.

and Aaker, Desai and Keller, and Keller.39 The managerial guidelines follow the conceptual structure of the brand territory. The guidelines will start with leader brand behaviour in relation to line extensions, proceed with brand extension into new categories, and go from there into the pertinent issue of co-branding at the product level. A real-world example is given exemplifying each of the guidelines. Carefully analyse the brand vision, the brand values and the strategic direction for the leader brand in the future, and assess how brand leveraging ts with the overall vision, mission and core values for the brand. CocaCola soft drinks in Scandinavia carefully assessed the brand personalities of different car brands before selecting a company car that reected the future brand vision and values. It was decided that the car brand should have an extrovert personality and individualistic values (see Figure 6). Expand the cultural or scientic brand meaning through institutional associations. Institutional associations should be selected with subtlety and positioned as an index and endorser for the leader brand. The Clinique brand reinforces a scientic positioning (medical doctor and research association) through its retail staffs white-collar uniform. In Scandinavia, McDonalds uses the McCafe brand as a bridge to institutional associations. In the positioning of the brand they use qualication marks such as Fairtrade, and Third World in117

BRAND MANAGERS GUIDELINES F0R LEVERAGING THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE

In this section, ten concrete managerial guidelines are presented for when and how to leverage established brand equity structures from partner brands and partner categories in a way that is strategic and efcient. Desai and Keller38 have pointed to the urgent need for such pragmatic managerial guidelines in relation to co-branding and ingredient branding. The guidelines in general and the rst three guidelines in particular benet from the underlying research ndings of Keller

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

UGGLA

Brand vision

Fit

Brand extension Brand alliance

Figure 6 The leader brand can either extend its own promise and associations (identity transfer) or it can leverage established brand equity from a partner (image transfer). Both strategies should be congruent with the strategic vision for the leader brand

gredients such as Espresso Equale, in order to signal social responsibility. Remember that brand alliances and co-branding in particular are special cases of brand extension. Before considering a brand alliance of any kind, carefully assess the possibility of direct line or brand extension from the leader brand. Does the leader brand (BMW) have skill, competence quality associations and complementary associations in the new category (mountain bikes) enough to extend without a partner? If the brand territory cannot be meaningfully expanded through direct extension, consider an image-transfer strategy. Philips Alessi illustrates the subtle link between extension and co-branding. Under the name Philips Alessi, ve electrical kitchen appliances were introduced: a toaster, a coffee machine, an electric kettle, a citrus press and a blender. For this product line,
118

Philips endorses technical and functional product quality; Alessi transfers skill in Italian design and self-expressive brand associations. Before developing a partner brand strategy, in order to avoid negative spillover effects, analyse the attitude towards each brand before, during and after the brand alliance. Remember that the attitude towards the brand before the alliance affects the attitude towards the alliance, and that the brand alliance can change or modify future attitudes for the involved brands. Kudos Granola Bars uses Snickers as a co-brand in the conjunction Kudos Milk Chocolate Granola Bars with Snickers chunks. The attitude towards the separate Kudos and Snickers brands among members of the target group can affect their attitude towards the alliance. Moreover, the attitude towards the co-brand can modify a customers post-alliance at-

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE

titude towards the individual brands in a positive (or negative) way. If the primary intention with the alliance is one of reinforcing and mirroring current core values, the partner brand should share the same core values and areas of similarity with respect to positioning. If the leader brand must be moved in a desired direction, the values and personality of the partner should reect that direction in order to create a strong co-branding effect. In this case both areas of similarity and areas of discrepancy need to be identied.40 For example, if the aim of the brand alliance is to reinforce the established brand identity of a dressy upmarket person, brands such as Boss, BMW and Bang & Olufsen share similar attributes with respect to the upmarket brand positioning, combined with a conservative brand personality dimension.41 If the aim is to create a strong co-branding effect and a synergy, Swatch with its dynamic brand personality may act as a complement to the more conservative personality of Mercedes (points of difference); however, both share an association with strong product quality, strong brand awareness and innovative technology (points of parity). If an attribute of the leader brand is modied in a line-extension strategy, a self-branded ingredient could be created. (A self-branded ingredient means an ingredient brand created by the brand owner instead of an external provider, ie the manufacturer has branded the ingredient instead of licensing it from the market.)

If more lemon avour is added to CocaCola light lemon, consider using a self-branded ingredient. For example, a citrus-shaped logo (more avour added). If a new attribute is introduced under the leader brand in a lineextension strategy, strive to borrow brand equity, core competence and expertise through a co-branded ingredient from a brand in the market. When the liqueur avour attribute was added to Ha agen-Dazs ice cream, image was transferred through a cobranding arrangement with Baileys Original Irish Cream. The strategy will create long-lasting credibility for the leader brand in relation to further category expansions.42 Use a planned sequence of partner categories as a strategic device for broadening and stretching the leader brands vision and meaning in a planned sequence of brand extensions. The strategy has the potential to increase the brand width, without tarnishing the core identity of the leader brand. The meaning of the Uncle Bens leader brand has been broadened from an attribute association with rice towards a provider of quality food in the broadest sense through a strategic sequence of brand extensions, ranging from complementary brand extensions (sauces) to entirely new categories (pasta and breakfast pancakes). Use the partner category to create points-of-parity when the leader brand is stretched horizontally.
119

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

UGGLA

Figure 7

Leader brands can enjoy strong spillover effects from strong partner brands

Calvin Klein consolidated a countryof-origin association when the company extended into the watch category. The Calvin Klein Watch Company is part of the Swatch Group.43 The Swiss-made brand association creates a quality connotation and establishes necessary points-of-parity with the new category. Connect a strong partner ingredient brand with high familiarity to a less familiar leader brand and capitalise on the spillover effect. For example, a strong ingredient brand may be used by a private brand of computers (a laptop with an Intel Celeron processor), shoes (Decathlon sport shoes with GORE-TEX) or bicycles (a Carrefour T mountain bike with Shimano gears) in order to reinforce its competitive position and offset the differentiation of competing brands44 (see Figure 7). Assess the risk with all co-branding arrangements and consider that if brand equity is borrowed, no new brand equity structures can be built. Consider the risks of losing control over the leader brand in
120

decentralised partner arrangements and that a large portfolio of partner brands can eschew and modify the brand identity of the leader brand. Consider the risks when the partner brand is a living person (for example, a sprinter, a rock star or any other living person). Balance the risk with ad hoc partnering with a strong brand alliance architecture. Ideally, the partner brand architecture should outline the positions of the leader brand and partner brand, and outline the brand association base structure and the specic type of brand alliance.

CONCLUSIONS
The brand association base is a strategic model for transfer of meaning to and from brands. The model provides research-based guidelines for links between leader brands and their connection to partner brands and partner categories. It is the rst model that applies semiotic sign categories to the eld of brand alliances for the benet of multiple brand positioning. In addition, the brand association base acknowledges the idea of intension. The model should not be viewed as a straightjacket; rather, it should inspire

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE

the brand strategist and academic researcher to assess all the opportunities arising from brand leverage activities offered through brand-to-category and brand-to-brand collaboration, in a way that is more holistic, structured and exible. The brand association base offers a novel semiotic description of how secondary brand associations and mature brand equity structures can be shared, leveraged and borrowed, as opposed to being built up from the bottom line. The model is based on the basic assumption that strategy-wise, partner brands in the surrounding environment should and could be viewed as an inclusive part of the leader brands own extended brand territory. The model suggests that secondary sources of brand equity could be moved for the benet of the brands involved in the alliance. Collaboration can help a brand to get access to the brand strategy and associations of a partner, to borrow needed expertise and to expand brandrelated meaning into new product categories. The model can be used as a mental map for all sorts of linking between a leader brand and other partner brand associations (sub-brands, ingredients, co-brands and alliances), people (employees and endorsers), places (country of origin and channels) or things (events, causes, third-party endorsements). Application areas include the design of brand extensions, general brand alliances and specic brand constellations, including cobranding at a product level (BianchiDucati mountain bikes), co-branding in distribution (Togos sandwiches and Baskin-Robbins ice cream), ingredient branding (Dell with Intel

Inside), ingredient co-branding (Chiquita bananas in Beechnut baby food) and limited co-promotions (Mattel toys in McDonalds Happy Meals). Although the model presented here encourages brand collaboration and transfer of secondary sources of brand equity, there are also obvious disadvantages and limitations to a brand association base strategy. Leader brands can lose control to partner brands; for example, GORE-TEX obliges its category leading brands in shoes to use GORE-TEX licensed production plants, and gradually conquers more space in advertisements and retail settings. Besides, leader brands can be vulnerable to negative-feedback effects. Negative-feedback effects can appear from weak partner brands or endorsers with a bad reputation. Finally, partner brands can grow stronger and turn, over time, into leader brands. Michael Jordan incarnates a transformative strategy he turned from endorser (in NIKE advertisements) to sub-brand (Nike Air Jordan) into the leader brand (his own shoe brand manufactured by NIKE). The brand association base adds depth and texture to the current discussion of brand leveraging, a discussion that will be even more important in the networked marketing landscape of the future.

Areas for future research

Important areas for future research include the development of more comprehensive brand architectures for brand collaboration, including various levels of positioning for partner brands in terms of constellations, co-brands and ingredient brands, as part of a leader brand portfolio. Future research
121

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

UGGLA

should include descriptions of the product/market roles for co-brands, driver roles and partner brand hierarchies. On the brand equity side, the brand association base framework can facilitate the discovery of sources of brand equity outside the identity of the leader brand. Pertinent research issues for the future will include the development of methodologies for separating contributions to leader brand equity from connected and licensed brands in the surrounding environment. Put differently, how much of the brand equity of ECCO-GORE-TEX should be attributed to the partner brand (GORE-TEX), and how much to the leader brand (ECCO)? This challenge includes research opportunities for both nancial and psychological brand equity metrics.
Acknowledgment
This research was made possible through support from Handelsbankens forskningsstiftelser and the research project Brands, Companies and Consumers: A Dynamic Perspective at KTH Industrial Economics and Management.

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9) (10)

(11)

(12)

References
(1) Keller, K. L. (2001) Editorial: Brand research imperatives, The Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 9, No. 1, September, pp. 46. (2) Knox, S., Maklan, S. and Thompson, K. E. (2000) Building the unique organizational value proposition, in Schultz, M. Hatch, M. J. and Larsen, M. H. (eds) The Expressive Organization: Linking Identity, Reputation and the Corporate Brand, Chapter 9, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp. 138153. (3) Doyle, P. (2001) Shareholder-value-based brand strategies, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 2030; Srivastava, R. K., Shervani, T. A. and Fahey, L. (1998) Market-based assets and shareholder value: A framework for analysis, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62, No. 1, pp. 218. (4) Aaker, D. A. and Keller, K. L. (1990) Consumer evaluations of brand extensions,

(13)

(14)

(15)

(16)

(17)

(18) (19)

Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, Winter, pp. 2741. Keller, K. L. and Aaker, D. A. (1992) The effects of sequential introductions of brand extensions, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 25, February, pp. 3550. Tauber, E. (1981) Brand franchise extension: New product benets from existing brand names, Business Horizons, Vol. 36, MarchApril pp. 3641; Tauber, E. (1993) Fit and leverage in brand extensions, in Aaker, D. A. and Biel, A. (eds) Brand Equity and Advertising, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. Simonin, B. L. and Ruth, J. A. (1998) Is a company known by the company it keeps? Assessing the spillover effects of brand alliances on consumer brand attitudes, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 35, February, pp. 3042. Baumgarth, C. (2000) Fit-reasons of co-branding, University of Siegen, Germany, Working Paper. Aaker, D. (1991) Managing Brand Equity, The Free Press, New York, NY. Keller, K. L. (1993) Conceptualizing, measuring and managing customer based brand equity, Journal of Marketing, No. 57, January, pp. 129. Keller, K. L. (2003) Brand synthesis: The multidimensionality of brand knowledge, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29, March, pp. 595600. Blackett, T. and Boad, B. (1998) Co-branding: The Science of Alliance, Interbrand MacMillan, London, UK. Motion, J., Leitch, S. and Broadie, R. J. (2003) Equity in corporate co-branding: The case of Adidas and the All Blacks, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37, Nos 7/8, pp. 10801094. Malaval, P. (2001) Strategy and Management of Industrial Brands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, UK. Hillyer, C. and Tikoo, S. (1995) Effect of co-branding on consumer product evaluations, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 22, pp. 123127. Keller, K. L. (2003) Leveraging secondary brand knowledge to build brand equity, in Keller, K. L. Strategic Brand Management, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Riezebos, R. (2003) Brand Management: A Theoretical and Practical Approach, Prentice Hall, Harlow, UK, pp. 80100. Blackett and Boad, ref. 12 above. Leuthesser, L., Kholi, C. and Suri, R. (2003) 2 2 5? A framework for using co-branding to leverage a brand, The

122

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

THE BRAND ASSOCIATION BASE

(20)

(21)

(22)

(23)

(24) (25) (26) (27) (28) (29)

(30)

(31) (32)

Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 11, No. 1, September, pp. 3547. Rosa, J. A. and Porac, J. F. (2002) Categorization bases and their inuence on product category knowledge structures, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 19, No. 6, pp. 503532. Kumar, S. R. (2003) Branding strategies in a changing marketing environment, The Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 4861. Schroeder, J. E. (1997) Andy Warhol: Consumer researcher, in Brucks, M. and MacInnis, D. J. (eds) Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 24, pp. 476482, Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT. Aaker, D. A. and Joachimsthaler, E. (2000) Brand Leadership, The Free Press, New York, NY. Keller, ref. 11 above. Riezebos, ref. 17 above. Keller, ref. 11 above. Aaker and Joachimsthaler, ref. 23 above. Eco, U. (1979) A theory of semiotics, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN. Uggla, H. (2000) Managing the Brand Association Base, doctoral dissertation, School of Business, Stockholm University, Sweden. Scandinavian Research (2003) Brand Tracking: Apparel Categories: A Quantitative Study, Veckans Affa rer, March. Srivastava et al., in ref. 3 above. Bucklin, L. P. and Sengupta, S. (1993) Organizing successful co-marketing

(33)

(34) (35) (36) (37)

(38)

(39)

(40)

(41) (42) (43) (44)

alliances, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, April, pp. 3246. Park, C. W., Jun, S. Y. and Shocker, A. D. (1996) Composite brand alliances: An investigation of extension and feedback effects, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 453466. Leuthesser et al., ref. 19 above. Uggla, ref. 29 above. Leuthesser et al., ref. 19 above. Keller, K. L. (2002) Strategic Brand Management, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Desai, K. and Keller, K. L. (2002) The effects of ingredient branding strategies on host brand extendibility, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66, January, pp. 7393. Keller, K. L. and Aaker, D. A. (1992) The effects of sequential introduction of brand extensions, Journal of Marketing Research, February, pp. 3550; Desai and Keller, ref. 38 above; Keller, ref. 11 above. Ruttenberg, A., Oren, H. and Honen, M. (1998) Brand coding and approach to developing an optimal compositioning, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 5, No. 5, pp. 333345. Baumgarth, ref. 8 above. Desai and Keller, ref. 38 above. The Swatch Group (2002) Annual Report, Biel, Switzerland. Vaidyanathan, R. and Aggrawal, P. (2000) Strategic brand alliances: Implications of ingredient branding for national and private label brands, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 214228.

HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1350-231X BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 12, NO. 2, 105123 NOVEMBER 2004

123