Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity Author(S): Kevin Lane Keller Source: Journal of Marketing, Vol

Home , Brand equity, Vol (command)

Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity Author(s): Kevin Lane Keller Source: Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, No. 1 (Jan., 1993), pp. 1-22 Published by: American Marketing Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1252054 . Accessed: 30/09/2013 12:03

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

American Marketing Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Marketing.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Kevin Lane Keller

Conceptualizing,Measuring,and ManagingCustomer-Based Brand Equity The author presents a conceptual model of brand equity from the perspective of the individual consumer. Customer-based brand equity is defined as the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand. A brand is said to have positive (negative) customer-based brand equity when consumers react more (less) favorably to an element of the marketing mix for the brand than they do to the same marketing mix element when it is attributed to a fictitiously named or unnamed version of the product or service. Brand knowledge is conceptualized according to an associative network memory model in terms of two components, brand awareness and brand image (i.e., a set of brand associations). Customer-based brand equity occurs when the consumer is familiar with the brand and holds some favorable, strong, and unique brand associations in memory. Issues in building, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity are discussed, as well as areas for future research.

M UCH attentionhas been devoted recently to the or divestiturepurposes. Several different methods of concept of brandequity (Aaker and Biel 1992; brand valuation have been suggested (Barwise et al. Leuthesser 1988; Maltz 1991). Brandequity has been 1989; Wentz 1989). For example, InterbrandGroup viewed from a variety of perspectives (Aaker 1991; has used a subjectivemultiplier of brandprofits based Farquhar1989; Srivastavaand Shocker 1991; Tauber on the brand's performancealong seven dimensions In a 1988). general sense, brandequity is defined in (leadership, stability, market stability, interational- terms of the effects marketing uniquely attributableto ity, trend, support, and protection);Grand Metropol- the brand-for when certain example, outcomes re- itan has valued newly acquiredbrands by determining sult from the of a or service be- marketing product the difference between the acquisitionprice and fixed cause of its brand name that would not occur if the assets. Simon and Sullivan (1990) define brandequity same productor service did not have that name. in termsof the incrementaldiscounted future cash flows There have been two motivations for general that would resultfrom a producthaving its brandname studying brand One is a based mo- equity. financially in comparisonwith the proceeds that would accrue if tivation to estimate the value of a brand more pre- the same productdid not have that brandname. Based cisely for accounting purposes (in terms of asset val- on the financial market value of the company, their uationfor the balancesheet) or for merger,acquisition, estimation technique extracts the value of brand equity from the value of a firm's other assets. KevinLane Keller is AssociateProfessor of Marketingand Fletcher Jones A second reason for Scholarfor GraduateSchool of studying brandequity arises Faculty 1992-1993, Business,Stanford from a Univerity.This article was written while the author was Visiting Profes- strategy-basedmotivation to improve market- sor at the AustralianGraduate School of Management,University of ing productivity. Given higher costs, greatercompe- NewSouth Wales, Sydney, Australia. He thanksDavid Aaker, Sheri tition, and flattening demand in many markets, firms Bridges,Deborah Macinnis, John Roberts, John Rossiter, Richard Stae- seek to increase the of their ex- lin,Jennifer Aaker, and the anonymous JM reviewers for detailed, con- efficiency marketing structivecomments. penses. As a consequence, marketersneed a more thoroughunderstanding of consumerbehavior as a ba-

Journal of Marketing Vol. 57 (January 1993), 1-22 Customer-BasedBrand Equity / 1

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions sis for making better strategic decisions about target in memory. Then the concept of customer-basedbrand marketdefinition and product positioning, as well as equity is considered in more detail by discussion of better tactical decisions about specific marketingmix how it can be built, measured, and managed. After actions. Perhaps a firm's most valuable asset for im- the conceptual framework is summarized, areas for proving marketingproductivity is the knowledge that future research are identified. has been createdabout the brandin consumers' minds from the firm's investmentin previous marketingprograms. Financial valuationissues have little relevance Brand Knowledge if no underlyingvalue for the brandhas been created or if managersdo not know how to exploit that value Background by developing profitablebrand strategies. A brandcan be defined as "a name, term, sign, sym- The goal of this article is to assist managers and bol, or design, or combination of them which is in- researcherswho are interestedin the strategic aspects tended to identify the goods and services of one seller of brandequity. Specifically, brandequity is concep- or group of sellers and to differentiatethem from those tualized from the perspective of the individual con- of competitors"(Kotler 1991; p. 442). These individ- sumer and a conceptualframework is providedof what ual brand components are here called "brandidenti- consumers know about brandsand what such knowl- ties" and their totality "the brand."Some basic mem- edge implies for marketingstrategies. Customer-based ory principles can be used to understandknowledge brandequity is definedas the differentialeffect of brand about the brand and how it relates to brand equity. knowledge on consumer response to the marketingof The importanceof knowledge in memoryto consumer the brand. That is, customer-basedbrand equity in- decision making has been well documented (Alba, volves consumers' reactionsto an element of the mar- Hutchinson, and Lynch 1991). Understanding the keting mix for the brandin comparisonwith their re- content and structureof brandknowledge is important actions to the same marketingmix element attributed because they influence what comes to mind when a to a fictitiously named or unnamed version of the consumer thinks about a brand-for example, in re- product or service. Customer-basedbrand equity oc- sponse to marketingactivity for that brand. curs when the consumer is familiarwith the brandand Most widely accepted conceptualizationsof mem- holds some favorable, strong, and unique brand as- ory structureinvolve some type of associative model sociations in memory. formulation(Anderson 1983; Wyer and Srull 1989). Conceptualizing brand equity from this perspec- For example, the "associativenetwork memory model" tive is useful because it suggests both specific guide- views semantic memory or knowledge as consisting lines for marketing strategies and tactics and areas of a set of nodes and links. Nodes are stored infor- where research can be useful in assisting managerial mation connected by links that vary in strength. A decision making. Two importantpoints emerge from "spreadingactivation" process from node to node de- this conceptualization.First, marketersshould take a termines the extent of retrieval in memory (Collins broad view of marketingactivity for a brandand rec- and Loftus 1975; Raaijmakers and Shiffrin 1981; ognize the various effects it has on brandknowledge, Ratcliff and McKoon 1988). A node becomes a po- as well as how changesin brandknowledge affect more tential source of activationfor other nodes eitherwhen traditionaloutcome measures such as sales. Second, external informationis being encoded or when inter- marketersmust realize that the long-term success of nal informationis retrievedfrom long-term memory. all future marketingprograms for a brand is greatly Activation can spread from this node to other linked affected by the knowledge about the brandin memory nodes in memory. When the activationof anothernode that has been establishedby the firm's short-termmar- exceeds some threshold level, the informationcon- keting efforts. In short, because the content and struc- tained in that node is recalled. Thus, the strengthof ture of memory for the brand will influence the ef- association between the activatednode and all linked fectiveness of futurebrand strategies, it is critical that nodes determines the extent of this "spreadingacti- managers understandhow their marketing programs vation" and the particularinformation that can be re- affect consumer learning and thus subsequent recall trieved from memory. For example, in consideringa for brand-relatedinformation. soft drink purchase, a consumer may think of Pepsi The next section provides a conceptualizationof because of its strong association with the productcat- brand knowledge by applying some basic memory no- egory. Consumer knowledge most strongly linked to tions. Brand knowledge is defined in terms of two Pepsi should also then come to mind, such as per- components,brand awareness and brandimage. Brand ceptions of its taste, sugar and caffeine content, or awareness relates to brandrecall and recognition per- even recalled images from a recent advertisingcam- formanceby consumers. Brandimage refers to the set paign or past productexperiences. of associations linked to the brandthat consumershold Consistent with an associative network memory

2 / Journalof Marketing,January 1993

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions model, brand knowledge is conceptualized as con- be a member of the consideration set (Baker et al. sisting of a brand node in memory to which a variety 1986; Nedungadi 1990), the handful of brands that of associations are linked. Given this conceptualiza- receive serious consideration for purchase. Second, tion, the key question is, what properties do the brand brand awareness can affect decisions about brands in node and brand associations have? As developed here, the consideration set, even if there are essentially no the relevant dimensions that distinguish brand knowl- other brand associations. For example, consumers have edge and affect consumer response are the awareness been shown to adopt a decision rule to buy only fa- of the brand (in terms of brand recall and recognition) miliar, well-established brands (Jacoby, Syzabillo, and and the favorability, strength, and uniqueness of the Busato-Schach 1977; Roselius 1971). In low involve- brand associations in consumer memory. These di- ment decision settings, a minimum level of brand mensions are affected by other characteristics of and awareness may be sufficient for product choice, even relationships among the brand associations. For ex- in the absence of a well-formed attitude (Bettman and ample, factors related to the type of brand association Park 1980; Hoyer and Brown 1990; Park and Lessig (such as its level of abstraction and qualitative nature) 1981). The elaboration likelihood model (Petty and and the congruity among brand associations, among Cacioppo 1986) suggests that consumers may base others, affect the favorability, strength, and unique- choices on brand awareness considerations when they ness of brand associations. To simplify the discus- have low involvement, which could result from either sion, emphasis is placed on the brand name compo- a lack of consumer motivation (i.e., consumers do not nent of the brand identities, defined as "that part of a care about the product or service) or a lack of con- brand which can be vocalized" (Kotler 1991, p. 442), sumer ability (i.e., consumers do not know anything though other components of the brand identities (e.g., else about the brands). Finally, brand awareness af- brand logo or symbol) are considered also. fects consumer decision making by influencing the formation and of brand associations in the Brand Awareness strength brand image. A necessary condition for the creation The first dimension distinguishing brand knowledge of a brand image is that a brand node has been estab- is brand awareness. It is related to the strength of the lished in memory, and the nature of that brand node brand node or trace in memory, as reflected by con- should affect how easily different kinds of informa- sumers' ability to identify the brand under different tion can become attached to the brand in memory. conditions (Rossiter and Percy 1987). In other words, how well do the brand identities serve their function? Brand Image In particular, brand name awareness relates to the brand likelihood that a brand name will come to mind and Though image long has been recognized as an the ease with which it does so. Brand awareness con- importantconcept in marketing (e.g., Gardnerand Levy 1955), there is less on its def- sists of brand recognition and brand recall perfor- agreement appropriate inition and Zinkhan Consistent with mance. Brand recognition relates to consumers' abil- (Dobni 1990). definitions by Herzog (1963) and Newman (1957), ity to confirm prior exposure to the brand when given among others, and an associative network the brand as a cue. In other words, brand recognition memory model of brand brand is defined requires that consumers correctly discriminate the brand knowledge, image here as about a brand as reflected the as having been seen or heard previously. Brand recall perceptions by brand associations held in consumer Brand relates to consumers' ability to retrieve the brand when memory. associations are the other informational nodes linked given the product category, the needs fulfilled by the to the brand node in and contain the category, or some other type of probe as a cue. In memory meaning of the brand for consumers. The other words, brand recall requires that consumers cor- favorability, strength, and of brand associations are the dimen- rectly generate the brand from memory. The relative uniqueness sions brand that an im- importance of brand recall and recognition depends on distinguishing knowledge play role in the extent to which consumers make decisions in the portant determining the differential response that makes brand in in- store (where they potentially may be exposed to the up equity, especially high volvement decision Before those brand) versus outside the store, among other factors settings. considering dimensions, it is useful to examine the different (Bettman 1979; Rossiter and Percy 1987). Brand rec- types of brand associations that be in consumer ognition may be more important to the extent that may present product decisions are made in the store. memory. Brand awareness plays an important role in con- Types of brand associations. Brand associations sumer decision for three making major reasons. First, take different forms. One way to distinguish among it is that important consumers think of the brand when brand associations is by their level of abstraction (Alba think about the they product category. Raising brand and Hutchinson 1987; Chattopadhyay and Alba 1988; awareness increases the likelihood that the brand will Johnson 1984; Russo and Johnson 1980)-that is, by

Customer-BasedBrand Equity / 3

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions how much informationis summarizedor subsumedin type of activity (formal or informal), among other as- the association. Along this dimension, brand associ- pects. User and usage image attributescan also pro- ations can be classified into three major categories of duce brandpersonality attributes. Plummer (1985) as- increasing scope: attributes, benefits, and attitudes. serts that one component of brand image is the Severaladditional distinctions can be made withinthese personality or characterof the brand itself. He sum- categories according to the qualitative nature of the marizes research demonstratingthat brands can be association. characterized by personality descriptors such as Attributesare those descriptive features that char- "youthful," "colorful," and "gentle." These types of acterize a productor service-what a consumerthinks associations seem to arise most often as a result of the product or service is or has and what is involved inferences about the underlying user or usage situa- with its purchase or consumption. Attributescan be tion. Brand personality attributes may also reflect categorized in a variety of ways (Myers and Shocker emotions or feelings evoked by the brand. 1981). Here, attributesare distinguishedaccording to Benefits are the personal value consumers attach how directly they relate to product or service perfor- to the productor service attributes-that is, what con- mance. Product-related attributes are defined as the sumers think the product or service can do for them. ingredients necessary for performing the product or Benefits can be furtherdistinguished into three cate- service function sought by consumers. Hence, they gories accordingto the underlyingmotivations to which relate to a product's physical composition or a ser- they relate (Park, Jaworski, and Maclnnis 1986): (1) vice's requirements.Product-related attributes vary by functional benefits, (2) experientialbenefits, and (3) product or service category. Non-product-related at- symbolic benefits. Functional benefits are the more tributes are defined as external aspects of the product intrinsic advantages of product or service consump- or service that relate to its purchaseor consumption. tion and usually correspondto the product-relatedat- The four main types of non-product-relatedattributes tributes.These benefits often are linked to fairly basic are (1) price information, (2) packaging or product motivations, such as physiological and safety needs appearanceinformation, (3) user imagery (i.e., what (Maslow 1970), and involve a desire for problem re- type of person uses the product or service), and (4) moval or avoidance (Fennell 1978; Rossiter and Percy usage imagery (i.e., where and in what types of sit- 1987). Experientialbenefits relate to what it feels like uations the product or service is used). to use the product or service and also usually corre- Because product-relatedattributes are more com- spond to the product-relatedattributes. These benefits monly acknowledged, only non-product-relatedattri- satisfy experiential needs such as sensory pleasure, butes are elaboratedhere. The price of the productor variety, and cognitive stimulation. Symbolic benefits service is considered a non-product-relatedattribute are the more extrinsic advantagesof product or ser- because it representsa necessary step in the purchase vice consumption. They usually correspond to non- process but typically does not relate directly to the product-relatedattributes and relateto underlyingneeds product performance or service function. Price is a for social approvalor personal expression and outer- particularly important attribute association because directedself-esteem. Hence, consumersmay value the consumers often have strong beliefs about the price prestige, exclusivity, or fashionabilityof a brandbe- and value of a brand and may organize their product cause of how it relates to their self-concept (Solomon category knowledge in terms of the price tiers of dif- 1983). Symbolic benefits should be especially rele- ferent brands(Blattberg and Wisniewski 1989). Sim- vant for socially visible, "badge"products. ilarly, packaging is considered part of the purchase Brand attitudes are defined as consumers' overall and consumptionprocess but, in most cases, does not evaluationsof a brand(Wilkie 1986). Brandattitudes directly relate to the necessary ingredientsfor product are importantbecause they often form the basis for performance. User and usage imagery attributescan consumer behavior (e.g., brandchoice). Though dif- be formed directly from a consumer's own experi- ferent models of brandattitudes have been proposed, ences and contactwith brandusers or indirectlythrough one widely accepted approachis based on a multiat- the depiction of the targetmarket as communicatedin tribute formulation in which brand attitudes are a brand advertising or by some other source of infor- function of the associated attributesand benefits that mation (e.g., word of mouth). Associations of a typ- are salient for the brand. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975; ical branduser may be based on demographicfactors Ajzen and Fishbein 1980) proposed what has been (e.g., sex, age, race, and income), psychographicfac- probably the most influential multiattributemodel to tors (e.g., according to attitudes toward career, pos- marketing (Bettman 1986). This expectancy-value sessions, the environment, or political institutions), model views attitudes as a multiplicativefunction of and other factors. Associations of a typical usage sit- (1) the salient beliefs a consumer has about the prod- uation may be based on the time of day, week, or uct or service (i.e., the extent to which consumersthink year, the location (inside or outside the home), or the the brandhas certainattributes or benefits) and (2) the

4 / Journalof Marketing,January 1993

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions evaluative judgment of those beliefs (i.e., how good Not all associations for a brand, however, will be or bad it is that the brandhas those attributesor ben- relevant and valued in a purchaseor consumptionde- efits). cision. For example, consumers often have an asso- Brand attitudes can be related to beliefs about ciation in memory from the brand to the product or product-relatedattributes and the functional and ex- package color. Though this association may facilitate perientialbenefits, consistent with work on perceived brand recognition or awareness or lead to inferences quality (Zeithaml 1988). Brand attitudescan also be about product quality, it may not always be consid- related to beliefs about non-product-relatedattributes ered a meaningful factor in a purchase decision. and symbolic benefits (Rossiter and Percy 1987), con- Moreover, the evaluations of brandassociations may sistent with the functional theory of attitudes (Katz be situationally or context-dependentand vary ac- 1960; Lutz 1991), which maintainsthat attitudescan cording to consumers' particulargoals in their pur- serve a "value-expressive"function by allowing in- chase or consumption decisions (Day, Shocker, and dividuals to express their self-concepts. Because it is Srivastava 1979). An association may be valued in difficult to specify correctly all of the relevant attri- one situationbut not another(Miller and Ginter 1979). butes and benefits, researchersbuilding multiattribute For example, speed and efficiency of service may be models of consumer preferencehave included a gen- very importantwhen a consumer is under time pres- eral componentof attitudetoward the brandthat is not sure but may have little impact when a consumer is capturedby the attributeor benefit values of the brand less hurried. (Park 1991; Srinivasan 1979). Moreover, as noted brand associations. Associations can previously, researchalso has shown that attitudescan Strength of be characterizedalso the of connection to be formedby less decision (Chaiken by strength thoughtful making the brandnode. The of associations 1986; and 1986)-for on the strength depends Petty Cacioppo example, on how the information basis of heuristics and decision rules. If con- enters consumermemory (en- simple and how it is sumers lack either the motivationor to evaluate coding) maintainedas part of the brand ability is a function of both the the or service, use or "ex- image (storage). Strength product they may signals amount or of the informationre- trinsic cues" (Olson and to infer quantity processing Jacoby 1972) product ceives at how much a thinks or service on the basis of what do know encoding (i.e., person quality they about the and the natureor of the aboutthe brand such as color information) quality (e.g., productappearance the informationreceives at or processing encoding (i.e., scent). the mannerin which a thinks about the infor- Thus, the different of brand associations person types mation).For the levels- or the brand include or example, depth-of-processing making up image product-related approach(Craik and Lockhart 1972; Craik and Tulv- attributes; non-product-related functional, experien- 1975; Lockhart, Craik, and main- or and ing Jacoby 1976) tial, symbolic benefits; overall brandattitudes. tains that the more the of informationis at- These associations can meaning vary according to their favor- tended to the the and during encoding, stronger resulting ability, strength, uniqueness. associations in memory will be. Thus, when a con- Favorability of brand associations. Associations sumer actively thinks about and "elaborates"on the differ according to how favorably they are evaluated. significanceof productor service information,stronger The success of a marketingprogram is reflected in the associations are created in memory. This strength, in creationof favorablebrand associations-that is, con- turn, increasesboth the likelihoodthat informationwill sumers believe the brand has attributesand benefits be accessible and the ease with which it can be re- that satisfy their needs and wants such that a positive called by "spreadingactivation." overall brand attitude is formed. Cognitive psychologists believe memory is ex- MacKenzie (1986) summarizesresearch evidence tremely durable, so that once information becomes suggesting that the "evaluativejudgment" component stored in memory its strength of association decays of expectancy-value models of attitude (i.e., con- very slowly (Loftus and Loftus 1980). Though "avail- sumer perceptions of the favorability of an attribute) able" and potentially retrievable in memory, infor- is both conceptually and empirically related to attri- mation may not be "accessible" and easily retrieved bute importance.Specifically, attributeimportance has withoutstrongly associatedreminders or retrievalcues and been equatedwith polarityof attributeevaluation (Ajzen (Tulving Psotka 1971). Thus, the particularas- and Fishbein 1980; Fishbeinand Ajzen 1975). In other sociations for a brand that are salient and "come to words, consumers are unlikely to view an attributeor mind" depend on the context in which the brand is considered. The benefit as very good or bad if they do not also con- larger the number of cues linked to a of sider it to be very important.Hence, it is difficult to piece information,however, the greaterthe likelihood thatthe informationcan be recalled create a favorable association for an unimportantat- (Isen 1992). tribute. Uniqueness of brand associations. Brand associ-

Customer-BasedBrand Equity / 5

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ations may or may not be sharedwith other competing America or some other market leader to be the best brands. The essence of brand positioning is that the example of a bank. brand has a sustainable competitive advantage or Because the brand is linked to the product cate- "unique selling proposition" that gives consumers a gory, some product category associations may be- compelling reason for buying that particularbrand come linked to the brand, either in terms of specific (Aaker 1982; Ries and Trout 1979; Wind 1982). These beliefs or overall attitudes.Product category attitudes differences may be communicatedexplicitly by mak- can be a particularlyimportant determinant of con- ing direct comparisons with competitors or may be sumer response. For example, if a consumer thinks highlighted implicitly without stating a competitive banks are basically "unfriendly"and "bad,"he or she point of reference. Furthermore,they may be based probablywill have similarlyunfavorable beliefs about on product-relatedor non-product-relatedattributes or and attitudetoward any particularbank simply by vir- functional, experiential, or image benefits. tue of its membershipin the category. Thus, in almost The presenceof stronglyheld, favorablyevaluated all cases, some productcategory associations that are associations that are unique to the brand and imply linked to the brandare sharedwith other brandsin the superiority over other brands is critical to a brand's category. Note that the strengthof the brand associ- success. Yet, unless the brandhas no competitors,the ations with the product category is an important brand will most likely share some associations with determinant of brand awareness (Nedungadi and other brands. Sharedassociations can help to establish Hutchinson 1985; Ward and Loken 1986). category membership(Maclnnis and Nakamoto 1991) Competitive overlap with other brands associated and define the scope of competition with other prod- with the productcategory does have a downside, how- ucts and services (Sujanand Bettman 1989). Research ever, in terms of possible consumer confusion. For on noncomparablealternatives (Bettman and Sujan example, Keller (1987) and Burke and Srull (1988) have 1987; Johnson 1984; Park and Smith 1989) suggests shown that the numberof competing brandsad- in a that even if a branddoes not face direct competition vertising productcategory can affect consumers' in its productcategory, and thus does not shareproduct- ability to recall communicationeffects for a brandby related attributeswith other brands, it can still share creating"interference" in memory. Keller (1991b) also showed that more abstract associations and face indirect compe- though these interferenceeffects can produce lower titionin a more broadlydefined product category. Thus, brandevaluations, they can be overcome the use though a railroadmay not compete directly with an- through of ad retrievalcues-that is, distinctive other railroad, it still competes indirectly with other ad execution informationthat is present when a forms of transportation,such as airlines, cars, and consumer actually makes a brandevaluation (e.g., at buses. the point of purchase). A productor service category can be characterized Interaction among characteristics of brand asso- also by a set of associations that include specific be- ciations. The level of abstractionand qualitativena- liefs about any member in the category in additionto ture of brand associations should affect their favora- overall attitudestoward all members in the category. bility, strength, and uniqueness. For example, image- These beliefs include many of the product-relatedat- relatedattributes, such as user type or usage situation, tributes for the relevant brands, as well as more de- may easily create unique associations. Abstract as- scriptive attributes that do not necessarily relate to sociations (e.g., benefits and especially attitudes), in product or service performance(e.g., the color of a contrast, tend to be inherently more evaluative be- product, such as red for ketchup). Certain attributes cause of the embedded meaning they contain. Be- or benefits may be considered "prototypical"and es- cause of this evaluative nature, abstractassociations sential to all brands in the category, and a specific tend to be more durableand accessiblein memorythan brand may be considered an "exemplar"that is most the underlying attributeinformation (Chattopadhyay representativeof the productor servicecategory (Cohen and Alba 1988). In fact, brandattitudes may be stored and Basu 1987;Nedungadi and Hutchinson1985; Rosch and retrieved in memory separatelyfrom the under- and Mervis 1975; Ward and Loken 1986). For ex- lying attributeinformation (Lynch, Mamorstein, and ample, consumersmight expect a runningshoe to pro- Weigold 1988). vide and support comfort, be built well enough to last One importantreason for considering brand atti- through repeated wearings, and so on, and they may tudes to be a brand association is that they can vary believe that Nike or some other leading brand best in strength(Farquhar 1989). Attitudestrength has been representsa runningshoe. Similarly,consumers might measured by the reaction time needed to evaluative a bank expect to offer a variety of checking and sav- queries about the attitude object (Fazio et al. 1986). ings accounts, provide branchand electronic delivery Individualswho can evaluatean attitudeobject quickly services, and so on, and they may consider Bank of are assumed to have a highly accessible attitude. Re-

6 / Journalof Marketing,January 1993

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions searchhas shown that attitudesformed from direct be- information-though the unexpectedness of infor- havior or experience are more accessible than atti- mation inconsistent in meaning with the brandsome- tudesbased on informationor indirectforms of behavior times can lead to moreelaborate processing and stronger (Fazio and Zanna 1981). Highly accessible brand at- associationsthan even consistentinformation (Houston, titudes are more likely to be activated spontaneously Childers, and Heckler 1987; Myers-Levy and Tybout upon exposureto the brandand guide subsequentbrand 1989; Wyer and Srull 1989). That is, consumersmay choices (Bergerand Mitchell 1989; Fazio, Powell, and have expectations as to the likelihood that a product Williams 1989). or service has a particularassociation given that it has Figure 1 summarizes the dimensions of brand some otherassociation (Bettman, John, and Scott 1986; knowledge. Sujan 1985). These expectations should affect consumers' ability to learn new brand information. For brand associations. Congruence of The favora- example, if a running shoe has a brand association and of a brand association can bility strength be af- with "very durable and long-lasting," presumablyit fected by other brand associations in memory. Con- would be easier to establish an association with "all is gruence defined as the extent to which a brand weather"than with "stylish." As noted subsequently, association shares content and meaning with another these expectationsalso may result in the formationof brand association. The congruence of brand associa- inferredbrand associations. Thus, the strengthof an tions should affect (1) how easily an existing associ- association should depend on how its content relates ation can be recalled and (2) how easily additional to the content of other associations for the brand. associations can become linked to the brand node in The congruence among brand associations deter- memory. In general, informationthat is consistent in mines the "cohesiveness" of the brand image-that meaning with existing brand associations should be is, the extent to which the brand image is character- more easily learned and rememberedthan unrelated ized by associationsor subsetsof associationsthat share

FIGURE 1 Dimensions of Brand Knowledge

Customer-BasedBrand Equity / 7

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions meaning. The cohesiveness of the brand image may brand with the response to the same marketingof a determine consumers' more holistic or gestalt reac- fictitiously named or unnamedversion of the product tions to the brand. Moreover, a "diffuse" brand im- or service. Brand knowledge is defined in terms of age, where there is little congruenceamong brandas- brand awareness and brand image and is conceptual- sociations for consumers,can presentseveral potential ized according to the characteristicsand relationships problemsfor marketers.First, consumersmay be con- of brandassociations described previously. Consumer fused as to the meaning of the brand and, because response to marketing is defined in terms of consumer they do not have as much informationto which new perceptions, preferences, and behavior arising from informationcan be easily related,new associationsmay marketingmix activity (e.g., brand choice, compre- be weakerand possibly less favorable(Heckler, Keller, hension of copy points from an ad, reactionsto a cou- and Houston 1992). Moreover, because any one as- pon promotion, or evaluations of a proposed brand sociation shares little meaning with other associa- extension). tions, brandassociations may be more easily changed Thus, accordingto this definition, a brand is said by competitive actions. Finally, anotherproblem with to have positive (negative) customer-based brand eq- a diffuse brand image is the greater likelihood that uity if consumers react more (less) favorably to the consumers will discount or overlook some potentially product, price, promotion, or distribution of the brand relevant brand associations in making brand deci- than they do to the same marketing mix element when sions. For example, research on "part-listcuing ef- it is attributed to a fictitiously named or unnamed ver- fects" has shown that recall of informationcan inhibit sion of the product or service. Favorable consumer and lower the recall of other informationfrom mem- response and positive customer-basedbrand equity, in ory (Alba and Chattopadhyay1985a,b, 1986; Hoch turn, can lead to enhanced revenue, lower costs, and 1984; Keller 1991a). Hence, only some of the poten- greaterprofits. Brandknowledge is centralto this def- tially retrievable brand associations actually may be inition. In particular,the favorability, strength, and recalled when the brand image is not cohesive and uniquenessof the brandassociations play a criticalrole consistent. in determiningthe differential response. If the brand is seen by consumersto be the same as a prototypical Customer-Based Brand version of the productor service in the category, their Equity response should not differ from their response to a As noted, brandequity has been defined in a variety hypotheticalproduct or service; if the brandhas some of ways, depending on the particularpurpose. Be- salient, unique associations, those responses should cause the goal of this article is to facilitate the de- differ. The actual nature of how the responses differ velopment of more effective marketingstrategies and depends on consumers' evaluations of these associa- tactics, the focus is on brandeffects on the individual tions, as well as the particularmarketing mix element consumer. The advantage of conceptualizing brand under consideration.Thus, establishing brandaware- equity from this perspective is that it enables man- ness and a "positive brand image" (i.e., favorable, agers to consider specifically how their marketing strong, and unique brand associations) in consumer programimproves the value of their brands. Though memorycreates different types of customer-basedbrand the eventual goal of any marketingprogram is to in- equity, depending on what marketingmix element is crease sales, it is first necessary to establish knowl- under consideration. A brief discussion highlighting edge structuresfor the brand so that consumers re- some relevant considerations for each of these ele- spond favorably to marketingactivity for the brand. ments follows. The preceding section provides a detailed framework Fundamentally,high levels of brandawareness and of brand knowledge. In this section, that framework a positive brandimage should increase the probability is used to consider in more detail how knowledge af- of brandchoice, as well as produce greaterconsumer fects consumer response to the marketingof a brand (and retailer) loyalty and decrease vulnerability to by defining customer-basedbrand equity and exam- competitivemarketing actions. Thus, the view of brand ining how it is built, measured, and managed. loyalty adopted here is that it occurs when favorable beliefs and attitudes for the brand are manifested in Defining Customer-Based Brand Equity repeat buying behavior. Some of these beliefs may Customer-based brand equity is defined as the differ- reflect the objective reality of the product, in which ential effect of brand knowledge on consumer re- case no underlyingcustomer-based brand equity may sponse to the marketing of the brand. Three impor- be present, but in other cases they may reflect favor- tant conceptsare includedin the definition:"differential able, strong, and unique associations that go beyond effect," "brandknowledge," and "consumerresponse the objective reality of the product (Park 1991). to marketing." Differential effect is determined by High levels of brandawareness and a positivebrand comparing consumer response to the marketingof a image also have specific implicationsfor the pricing,

8 / Journalof Marketing,January 1993

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions distribution, and promotion activities related to the Choosing brand identities. To see how the initial brand. First, a positive image should enable the brand choice of the brandidentities can affect brandequity, to command larger margins and have more inelastic consider the choice of a brandname. A variety of cri- responses to price increases. The most importantas- teria have been suggested for the selection of a brand pect of the brand image that affects consumer re- name (e.g., Aaker 1991; Kotler 1991;Robertson 1989). sponses to prices is probably overall brand attitude. They generally can be classified accordingto whether Consumers with a strong, favorable brand attitude they help enhance brand awareness or facilitate the should be more willing to pay premiumprices for the linkage of brandassociations. brand (Starr and Rubinson 1978). Similarly, a posi- Alba and Hutchinson(1987) give an extensive dis- tive image should result in increasedconsumer search cussion of psychological principlesthat can be useful (Simonson, Huber, and Payne 1988) and a willing- in understandinghow the choice of a nameaffects brand ness to seek out distributionchannels for the product recall and recognition processes. Some criteriaoften or service. Finally, high levels of brandawareness and noted by otherresearchers are that brandnames should a positive brand image can increase marketingcom- be simple, familiar, and distinctive, along the follow- municationeffectiveness. All aspects of the brandim- ing lines. To enhance the likelihood of successful pro- age are relevant in determiningconsumer response to cessing at encoding, the brand name should be easy advertising and promotion. For example, several au- to comprehend,pronounce, and spell. In fact, market thors note that advertisingresponse and decay patterns researchers sometimes evaluate the "flicker percep- are a function of consumers' attitudes and behavior tion" of brandnames (i.e., how quickly a brandname towardthe brand(Ray 1982; Rossiterand Percy 1987). can be perceived and understoodwhen exposed only They maintainthat consumers who are positively pre- for an instant) to assess consumer learning of candi- disposed toward a brand may require fewer ad ex- date brand names (Dolan 1985). To improve con- posures to meet communicationobjectives. Similarly, sumer learningof the brand, mnemonic factors (e.g., one could argue that strong attributeor benefit asso- One-A-Day) and vivid words are often employed that ciationsfor the brandrequire less reinforcementthrough have rich evaluativeor experientialimagery (Robertson marketingcommunications. 1987; but see Myers-Levy 1989). Similarly, the use In these different ways, customer-basedbrand eq- of a familiar word should be advantageousbecause uity is enhanced by creating favorable response to much informationis present in memory to which the pricing, distribution, advertising, and promotion ac- name relates. Finally, a distinctiveword is often sought tivity for the brand. Moreover, a familiar brand with to attractattention and reduce confusion among com- a positive brand image can also yield licensing op- peting brands. portunities (i.e., the brand name is used by another These different choice criteria for a brand name firm on one of its products)and supportbrand exten- are not necessarily mutually compatible, and it may sions (i.e., a firm uses an existing brandname to in- be difficult to choose names that are simple, familiar, troducea new productor service),two importantgrowth and distinctive. Moreover, factors affecting the ease strategies for firms in recent years. Licensing can be with which a brandname is recalled differ from fac- a valuable source of royalty income, as evidenced by tors affecting the ease with which a brand name is the substantialmerchandising efforts in recent years, recognized. For example, past research suggests that and typically has been employed when brand associ- high frequency words (according to conventional use ations have strong user imagery or brand personality in language) are easier to recall than low frequency attributes.A more substantialinvestment and risk pro- words, but low frequencywords may be easier to rec- file for the company, however, is requiredwith brand ognize than high frequencywords (Gregg 1976; Lynch extensions. Because of their potentiallylasting effects and Srull 1982). This finding suggests that choosing on consumer knowledge and the effectiveness of fu- a familiarword representinga well-known concept or ture marketingactivity, brand extensions are consid- some othercommon object or propertyas a brandname ered in more detail in the section on managing may facilitate brandrecall, but that choosing a more customer-basedbrand equity. unusual or distinctive word may facilitate brandrec- ognition. Deciding whether to emphasize recall or Building Customer-Based Brand Equity recognition propertiesin choosing a brand name de- Building customer-based brand equity requires the pends on managerialpriorities concerning the extent creationof a familiarbrand that has favorable, strong, of consumers' in-store processing for the product,the and unique brandassociations. This can be done both natureof the competitive environment, and so on. the initial through choice of the brandidentities, such The choice of a brand name may also affect the as the brand name, logo, or symbol, and throughthe favorability, strength, and uniqueness of brand asso- integrationof the brand identities into the supporting ciations. The suggestiveness or meaningfulnessof the marketingprogram. brand name should affect how easily brand associa-

Customer-BasedBrand Equity / 9

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions tions are created. The brand name can be chosen to product or service specifications themselves are the suggest semantically (1) the product or service cate- primary basis for the product-relatedattribute asso- gory or (2) importantattributes or benefits within that ciations and determinea consumer's fundamentalun- category. The first considerationshould enhancebrand derstanding of what the product or service means. name awareness and the identificationwith the prod- Similarly, the pricing policy for the branddirectly cre- uct category. The second consideration affords two ates associations to the relevant price tier or level for importantbenefits. First, even in the absence of any the brand in the product category, as well as its cor- marketingactivity, the semantic meaning of a sugges- respondingprice volatility or variance (e.g., in terms tive brand name may enable consumers to infer cer- of the frequency and magnitudeof discounts). tain attributesand benefits. For example, consumers The marketingcommunication efforts by the firm, could assume on the basis of the names alone that in contrast, afford a flexible means of shaping con- Daybreak cereal is wholesome and natural, Chief sumer perceptionsof the productor service. At times, laundrydetergent removes tough stains, and Diamond marketersmay have to translate attributesinto their toothpaste whitens and brightens teeth. Second, a correspondingbenefits for consumers through adver- suggestive brand name may facilitate marketing ac- tising or other forms of communication. Marketing tivity designedto link certainassociations to the brand. communicationsalso may be helpful in creating user Ideally, the brand name can be effectively supported and usage imagery attributes. The strength of brand through marketingcommunications and a distinctive associations from communicationeffects depends on slogan that ties together the brand name and its po- how the brand identities are integratedinto the sup- sitioning. porting marketing program-for example, the posi- Similar choice criteria apply to the other brand tion and prominenceof the brand identities in a tele- identities, such the brandlogo or symbol. Moreover, vision ad (Keller 1992). Though delaying brand another importantobjective is to choose the various identificationuntil the end of a television commercial brandidentities to be mutuallyreinforcing so that they may increase attention levels during commercial ex- interact positively to satisfy these criteria. Neverthe- posure, resultingin many communicationeffects being less, although the judicious choice of brandidentities stored in memory (e.g., ad execution and brandclaim can contribute significantly to customer-basedbrand information, as well as affective and cognitive re- equity, the primaryinput comes from supportingmar- sponses to that information),it may also produceweak keting activities for the brandand the variousproduct, links from these effects to the brand. Finally, word- price, advertising, promotion, and distributiondeci- of-mouth and other social influences also play an im- sions, as discussed next. portantrole, especially for user and usage imagery attributes. Developing supporting marketing programs. Marketing programs are designed to enhance brand Leveraging secondary associations. The defini- awarenessand establish favorable, strong, and unique tion of customer-basedbrand equity does not distin- brandassociations in memory so that consumers pur- guish between the sources of brandbeliefs (Fishbein chase the product or service. Brand awareness is re- and Ajzen 1975)-that is, whetherbeliefs are created lated to brandfamiliarity. Alba and Hutchinson(1987) by the marketeror by some other source of influence define brand familiarity as the number of product- such as referencegroups or publicity. All that matters relatedexperiences that have been accumulatedby the is the favorability, strength, and uniqueness of brand consumer (throughproduct usage, advertising, etc.). associations which, combined with brand awareness, Greaterbrand familiarity, throughrepeated exposures can produce differential consumer response to the to a brand, should lead to increased consumer ability marketingof a brand. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile to recognize and recall the brand. Thus, the appro- to consider in greater depth how belief associations priate marketingstrategy to increase brandawareness about the attributesand benefits of the brandarise. and familiarityis clear from the definition-anything One way belief associations are created is on the that causes the consumer to "experience"or be ex- basis of direct experience with the productor service. to the posed brand has the potential to increase fa- A second way is by informationabout the productor miliarity and awareness. Frequent and prominent service communicated by the company, other com- mentions in advertising and promotion vehicles can mercial sources, or word of mouth. Of the two, direct intrusively increase consumer exposure to the brand, experience may create stronger associations in mem- as can event or sportssponsorship, publicity, and other ory given its inherent self-relevance (Hertel 1982). activities. These episodic memory traces (Tulving 1983) may be Favorable, strong, and unique associations can be especially importantfor user and usage image attri- created the by marketingprogram in a variety of well- bute associations. A third importantway that belief established ways that are only highlighted here. The associations are created is on the basis of inferences

10 / Journalof Marketing,January 1993

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions from some existing brandassociations. That is, many choose a hybrid or sub-brandstrategy whereby they associations are assumed to exist for the brand be- combine their company name with individual brand cause it is characterizedby otherassociations. The type names (e.g., Kellogg's Corn Flakes and Courtyardby and strengthof inferencing are a function of the cor- Marriott).The latter two types of brandingstrategies relations perceived by consumers among attributesor should facilitate access to consumers'overall attitudes benefits (Ford and Smith 1987; Huber and McCann towardthe company. The sub-brandstrategy offers an 1982). For example, some consumers in certain cat- additionalpotential benefit in that it can allow for the egories may infer a high level of product or service creation of more specific brand beliefs. quality from a high price, as well as infer specific Similarly, a brand may be associated with its attributesor benefits such as prestige and social sta- "country of origin" (i.e., the country in which the tus. Dick, Chakravarti,and Biehal (1990) referto these company makes the product or provides the service) types of inferences as based on "probabilisticconsis- in such a way that consumersinfer specific beliefs and tency." They note that "evaluative consistency" in- evaluations (Erickson, Johansson, and Chao 1984; ferences may also occur, as when consumersinfer the Hong and Wyer 1989, 1990). For example, French favorabilityof a brandattribute or benefit on the basis wines, Germanautomobiles, and Japaneseelectronics of their overall brand attitude or their evaluation of probablyall benefit from such inferences. Finally, the some other perceived attributeor benefit. distributionchannels for a product may also create Another type of inferredassociation occurs when secondaryassociations. Consumerscan form "brand" the brand association itself is linked to other infor- images of retailers (Jacoby and Mazursky 1984) on mation in memory that is not directly related to the the basis of theirproduct assortment, pricing and credit productor service. Because the brandbecomes iden- policy, quality of service, and so on. These store im- tified with this other entity, consumers may infer that ages have associations that may be linked to the prod- the brand shares associations with that entity, thus ucts they sell (e.g., prestigeand exclusivityvs. bargain- producingindirect or "secondary"links for the brand. driven and mass appeal). Similartypes of images may These secondary associations may lead to a transfer be formed for catalogs and other forms of direct mar- of global associations such as attitude or credibility keting. (e.g., expertise, trustworthiness,and attractiveness) The final two types of secondary associations oc- or more specific attributesand benefits related to the cur when the primarybrand associations are for user product or service meaning. Secondary associations and usage situation attributes, especially when they may arise from primaryattribute associations related are for a particular person or event. Considerthe case to (1) the company, (2) the country of origin, (3) the in which advertisingcreates an association between a distributionchannels, (4) a celebrity spokespersonor brand and a celebrity endorser (Rossiter and Percy endorsorof the productor service, or (5) an event. 1987). As a result, other associations for the celebrity The first three types of secondaryassociations in- may become related to the brand. Ideally, one such volve "factualsources" for the brand(i.e., who makes association would be a favorable attitude toward the it, where it is made, and where it is purchased).This celebrity-for example, a well-known person could informationis almost always potentially available to lend credibility to product or service claims because consumers,but its strengthof associationwith the brand of his or her expertise, trustworthiness,or attractive- depends on the emphasis it receives. First, the brand ness. Additionally, more specific beliefs may be in- may vary by the extent to which it is identified with volved (Kahle and Homer 1985; McCracken 1989). a particularcompany. Establishinga connection with Thus, consumers have images of celebrity endorsors a company may cause existing associations for that in their minds as a result of observing the celebrities company to become secondary associations for the in their own field of endeavor or as a result of media brand (e.g., perceptions of company reputationand coverage. A celebrity invariablyhas some personality credibility). The branding strategy adopted by the attributeassociations, as well as possibly some product- company making the productor providingthe service related attributeassociations, that may become linked is the most importantfactor affecting the strength of to the brand. Similarly, a brandmay also become as- the company's association with the brand.Three main sociatedwith a particularevent. Again, that event may brandingstrategies are possible (Kotler 1991). First, be characterizedby a set of attributeand attitudeas- companies may choose individual brand names for sociationsin memory. When the brandbecomes linked different products and services without any explicit with the event, some of these associations with the mentionof the company (e.g., Procter& Gamblewith event may become indirectlyassociated with the brand. Tide, Bold, Dash, Cheer, Gain, Oxydol, and Duz Finally, as noted previously, identification with the laundry detergents). Second, companies may choose product category itself can also result in inferences their name for all of their productsor services (e.g., producing secondary associations. General Electric and Heinz). Third, companies may Secondary brandassociations may be importantif

Customer-BasedBrand Equity / 11

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions existing brandassociations are deficient in some way. the characteristicsand relationshipsamong brand as- In other words, secondary associations can be lever- sociations. Because any one measure typically cap- aged to create favorable, strong, and unique associ- tures only a particularaspect of brand knowledge, ations that otherwise may not be present. Choosing to multiple measures must be employed to capture the emphasize the company or a particularperson, place, multidimensionalnature of brandknowledge. or event should be based on consumers' awarenessof Brandawareness can be assessedeffectively through that entity, as well as how the beliefs and attitudes a variety of aided and unaided memory measures(see about the entity can become linked to the brand (see Srull 1984 for a review) that can be applied to test chapter 11 of Rossiter and Percy 1987 for an excellent brandrecall and recognition. For example, brandrec- discussion). Such a strategymakes sense if consumers ognition measures may use the actual brandname or already have associations for the company, person, some perceptuallydegraded version of the brandname place, or event that are congruentwith desired brand (Alba and Hutchinson 1987). Brand recall measures associations. For example, consider a country such as may use different sets of cues, such as progressively New Zealand, which is known for having more sheep narrowly defined product category labels. Besides than people. A New Zealandsweater manufacturer that correctness, the ease of recall and recognitionperfor- promotes its producton the basis of its New Zealand mance can be assessed with more subtlemeasures such wool presumably could more easily establish strong as response latencies to provide a fuller picture of and favorable brand associations because New Zea- memory performancewith respect to the brand(Fazio land may alreadymean "wool" to many people. Sec- 1987). Brandrecall can also be coded in terms of the ondarybrand associations may be risky, however, be- orderof recall to capturethe extent to which the name cause some control of the brand image is given up. is "top of mind" and thus strongly associated with the The company, person, place, or event that makes up productcategory in memory. the primarybrand association will undoubtedlyhave There are many ways to measure the characteris- a host of associations of which only some smaller set tics of brand associations (i.e., their type, favorabil- will be of interestto the marketer.Managing the transfer ity, and strength). Qualitativetechniques can be em- process so that only the relevant secondary associa- ployed to suggest possible associations. For example, tions become linked to the brand may be difficult. free association tasks can be used wherebyconsumers Moreover, these images may change over time as con- describe what the brandmeans to them in an unstruc- sumers learn more about the entity, and new associ- tured format, either individually or in small groups. ations may or may not be advantageousfor the brand. Specifically, consumers might be probed in terms of "who, what, when, where, why, and how" types of Measuring Customer-Based Brand Equity questionsabout the brand.Projective techniques (Levy 1978, such as sentence Thereare two basic approachesto customer- 1981, 1985) completion, pic- measuring ture and brand based brandequity. The "indirect"approach interpretation, personality descriptors attempts also be if consumers are un- to assess potential sources of customer-basedbrand may useful, especially or otherwise unable to their equity by measuring brand knowledge (i.e., brand willing express feelings. These indirect not ade- awareness and brand image). The "direct" measures, however, may approach the or of asso- attemptsto measurecustomer-based brand equity more quately capture favorability strength ciations, and more direct measuresoften are directly by assessing the impact of brand necessary knowledge to additionalinformation. For on consumerresponse to differentelements of the firm's provide example, Ajzen and Fishbein a detailed of how marketing program. The indirect and direct (1980) give description ap- beliefs and evaluations of attributesand benefits can proaches to measuring customer-basedbrand equity be scaled and how attitudescan be measured are complementaryand should be used together. The through a structured an illustrative indirectapproach is useful in identifying what format, providing example aspects in a consumer As noted of brandknowledge cause the differentialresponse that setting. previously, response creates customer-based brand the direct time measures of attitudeshave been used as a proxy equity; ap- for attitude proach is useful in determiningthe natureof the dif- strength. brand ferential response. Though detailed and Relationships among associations can be descriptions measured two critiquesof the many specific techniquesbehind these by general approaches:(1) comparing the characteristicsof brand associations in some two approaches are beyond the scope of this article way and consumersfor information (see Aaker 1991 for additional discussion), it is (2) directly asking relevant to the or le- worthwhile to highlight them briefly. congruence, competitive overlap, verage for the brand associations. Congruence is the Indirect approach. The first approachto measur- extent to which brand associations are shared. Con- customer-based ing brand equity, measuring brand gruence can be assessed by comparingthe patternof knowledge, requires measuring brand awareness and associations across consumersto determinewhich as-

12 / Journalof Marketing,January 1993

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions sociations are common or distinctive. Additionally, brandattribution. Past researchof this type has shown consumers could be asked directly their conditional that knowledge of the brandaffects consumerpercep- expectations for attribute,benefit, or attitude associ- tions, preferences, and choices for a product (e.g., ations (i.e., the likelihood that a product or service Allison and Uhl 1964; Jacoby, Olson, and Haddock has one association given that it has another). 1971). Blind tests could be used to examine consumer Competitive overlap of brand associations is the response to other elements of the marketingmix such extent to which brand associations are linked to the as proposed pricing, promotion, and channels of dis- product category (i.e., identification) and are or are tributionchanges. not shared with other brands(i.e., uniqueness). Iden- One importantconsideration with the direct ap- tification can be assessed by examining how con- proachis the experimentalrealism that can be achieved sumers respondto brandrecall tasks with productcat- when some aspect of the marketingprogram is attrib- egory or some other type of cues. Uniquenessof brand uted to a fictitiously named or unnamedversion of the associations can be assessed by comparing the char- productor service. Detailed concept statementscan be acteristicsof associationsof the focal brand(i.e., their employed in some situations when it may be other- type, favorability, and strength) with the character- wise difficult for consumersto examine or experience istics of associations for competing brands. Addition- the marketingmix element withoutbeing awareof the consumerscould be asked how ally, directly(1) strongly brand. Thus, concept statementsmay be useful in as- the brandwith the and they identify productcategory sessing customer-basedbrand equity when consumers what consider to be the and shared (2) they unique make a product choice or evaluate a change in the of the brand. Multivariate such as aspects techniques productor service a brand multidimensional also can be composition,judge proposed scaling employed (Aaker extension, or respond to a proposed price or distri- and Day 1986). bution change. Assessing customer-basedbrand eq- Leverage is the extent to which other brand as- uity with marketingcommunications a sociations linked to a brand association become sec- presents bigger challenge with the direct consumerre- associations for the brand. can be approach(e.g., ondary Leverage sponse to a new In assessed the characteristicsfor proposed advertisingcampaign). by comparing the par- this case, and animaticor ver- ticular or storyboards photomatic company, person, place, event, productcat- sions of an ad could be used ratherthan a finished ad egory with those characteristicsfor the focal brandac- to allow for the necessarydisguise of the brand.Though cording to their and type, favorability, strength. this approachshould work well with "informational" consumerscould be asked what Additionally, directly ads, it would be less for "trans- inferences are made about the brand on the basis of probably appropriate formational"ads emphasizing user, usage, or some knowledge of the particular person, place, event, other type of imagery, in which productionvalues are company, or productcategory. a critical ingredientin achieving communicationgoals Direct approach. The second approach to mea- (Rossiter and Percy 1987). suring customer-basedbrand equity, directly measur- Finally, anotherpotentially useful approachfor di- ing the effects of brand knowledge on consumer re- rectly assessing customer-basedbrand equity is con- sponse to marketingfor the brand,requires experiments joint or tradeoffanalysis (Green and Srinivasan1978, in which one group of consumersresponds to an ele- 1990; Green and Wind 1975). Conjoint analysis can ment of the marketingprogram when it is attributed be used to explore the main effects of the brandname to the brandand anothergroup of consumersresponds (i.e., differencesin preferenceor choice for the brand) to that same element when it is attributedto a ficti- and interactioneffects between the brand name and tiously named or unnamed version of the product or other marketingmix elements such as price, product service. By attributingthe marketing element to an or service features, and promotionor channel choices unfamiliaror anonymous product, consumers should (i.e., differences in perceptions for the brand). For interpretit with respectto theirgeneral knowledge about example, Rangaswamy, Burke, and Oliva (1990) use the productor service, as well as prototypicalproduct conjoint analysis to explore how brandnames interact or service specifications and price, promotion, and with physical product features to affect the extenda- distribution strategies.Comparing the responsesof the bility of brandnames to new productcategories. Note two groups thus provides an estimate of the effects thatif conjointanalysis is employed,care must be taken due to the specific knowledge about the brand that that consumers do not evaluate unrealistic product goes beyond basic product or service knowledge. profiles or scenarios that violate their basic expecta- The classic example of this approach is the so- tions for the productor brand(Park 1991; Srinivasan called "blind" test in which consumers evaluate a 1979). producton the basis of a description, examination, or Table 1 summarizesthe differentmeasurement al- actual consumptionexperience, either with or without ternativesfor customer-basedbrand equity.

Customer-BasedBrand Equity/ 13

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TABLE 1 Measurement of Brand Knowledge Constructs Related to Customer-Based Brand Equitya Construct Measure(s) Purpose of Measure(s) Brand Awareness Recall Correct identification of brand given Capture "top-of-mind" accessibility of product category or some other type of brand in memory probe as cue Recognition Correct discrimination of brand as having Capture potential retrievability or been previously seen or heard availability of brand in memory Brand Image Characteristics of brand associations Type Free association tasks, projective Provide insight into nature of brand techniques, depth interviews associations Favorability Ratings of evaluations of associations Assess key dimension producing differential consumer response Strength Ratings of beliefs of association Assess key dimension producing differential consumer response Relationships among brand associations Uniqueness Compare characteristics of associations Provide insight into the extent to which with those of competitors (indirect brand associations are not shared with measure) other brands; assess key dimension Ask consumers what they consider to be producing differential consumer response the unique aspects of the brand (direct measure) Congruence Compare patterns of associations across Provide insight into the extent to which consumers (indirect measure) brand associations are shared, affecting Ask consumers conditional expectations their favorability, strength, or uniqueness about associations (direct measure) Leverage Compare characteristics of secondary Provide insight into the extent to which associations with those for a primary brand associations to a particular person, brand association (indirect measure) place, event, company, product class, etc. Ask consumers directly what inferences are linked to other associations, they would make about the brand based producing secondary associations for the on the primary brand association (direct brand measure) 'This table describes the indirect approach of assessing potential sources of customer-based brand equity by measuring brand knowledge. The direct approach to measuring customer-based brand equity involves measuring the effects of brand knowledge on consumer response to marketing-for example, by conducting experiments in which one group of consumers respond to an element of the marketing mix when it is attributed to the brand, and another group of consumers respond to the same marketing mix element when it is attributed to a fictitiously named or unnamed version of the product or service.

Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity tentially can create value for the brand by improving consumers' to recall or the brand According to the definition of customer-basedbrand ability recognize and/ or or the favora- equity, no single number or measure brand by creating, maintaining, changing captures or of various of brand Rather, brand should be of as bility, strength, uniqueness types equity. equity thought associations. brand in one a multidimensional that on what By influencing knowledge concept depends (1) or more of these different structuresare in the minds of con- ways, marketing activity knowledge present can affect sales. sumers and what actions a firm can take to potentially (2) capi- Second, marketers should define the talize on the knowledge potential offered by these knowledge structures that would like to create in the minds structures.Different firms be more or less able they may of consumers-that is, by desired levels of to maximize the value of brand to specifying potential according awareness and favorability, strength, and uniqueness the and nature of activities that type marketing they of product- and non-product-related attributes; func- are able to undertake. six Nevertheless, generalguide- tional, experiential, and symbolic benefits; and over- lines based on the preceding conceptual framework all attitudes. In particular, marketers should decide on are presented here to help marketersbetter manage the core needs and wants of consumers to be satisfied customer-basedbrand equity. by the brand. Marketers should also decide the extent First, marketersshould adopt a broadview of mar- to which it is necessary to leverage secondary asso- keting decisions. Marketing activity for a brand po- ciations for the brand-that is, link the brand to the

14 / Journalof Marketing,January 1993

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions company, product class, or particularperson, place, marketers should also conduct controlled experi- or event in such a way that associations with those ments. Consumer knowledge of competitive brands entities become indirect or "secondary"associations should be similarly trackedto provide informationon for the brand. their sources of customer-basedbrand equity. Exper- Third, marketersshould evaluate the increasingly iments with consumer response to marketingactivity large numberof tacticaloptions available to createthese for competitive brands can also provide a useful knowledge structures,especially in terms of various benchmark-for example, to determine the unique- marketingcommunication alternatives. For example, ness of brand associations. the recent growth of "nontraditional"media, promo- Finally, marketers should evaluate potential ex- tions, and other marketingactivity (e.g., sports and tension candidates for their viability and possible event sponsorship; in-store advertising; "minibill- feedbackeffects on core brandimage. Given their po- boards" in transitvehicles, on parkingmeters, and in tential importanceto long-termbrand value, brandex- other locations; and productplacement in movies and tension decisions are considered in detail in the rest television shows) is appropriatefrom the perspective of this section from the perspectiveof customer-based of customer-basedbrand equity. As noted previously, brandequity and other relevant research. the manner in which a brand association is created Brandextensions capitalizeon the brandimage for does not matter-only the resulting favorability, the core productor service to efficiently inform con- strength, and uniqueness. Thus, many of these new sumersand retailersabout the new productor service. alternatives can offer a cost-effective means of af- Brandextensions can facilitate acceptanceof the new fecting brandknowledge and thus sales, especially to product or service by providing two benefits. First, the extent that they complementmore traditionalmar- awareness for the extension may be higher because keting tactics. Regardless of which options are cho- the brand node is already present in memory. Thus, sen, the entire marketingprogram should be coordi- consumers should need only to establish a connection natedto createcongruent and strongbrand associations. in memory between the existing brand node and the Different marketing tactics with the same strategic new product or service extension. Second, inferred goals, if effectively integrated,can createmultiple links associations for the attributes, benefits, and overall to core benefits or other key associations, helping to perceived quality may be created. In other words, produce a consistent and cohesive brandimage. Mar- consumers may form expectations for the extension keters should judge the consistency and cohesiveness on the basis of what they alreadyknow aboutthe core of the brandimage with the businessdefinition in mind brand. These inferences can lower the cost of the in- (Levitt 1960) and how well the specific attributesand troductorycampaign for the extension-for example, benefits that the productor service is intendedto pro- by increasing advertisingefficiency (Smith and Park vide to consumers satisfy their core needs and wants 1992). (Kotler 1991; Park, Jaworski, and Maclnnis 1986). Keller and Aaker (1992) review relevantliterature Fourth, marketersshould take a long-termview of to provide a conceptual model of how consumersuse marketing decisions. The changes in consumer their knowledge to evaluate a brand extension. They knowledge about the brand from current marketing maintainthat extension evaluationswill dependon the activity also will have an indirecteffect on the success salience of the core brand associations in the exten- of future marketing activities. Thus, from the per- sion context, how relevantconsumers perceive this in- spective of customer-basedbrand equity in making formationto be to theirextension evaluations, and how marketingdecisions, it is importantto consider how favorable inferred associations are in the extension resulting changes in brandawareness and image may context. In other words, extension evaluations will help or hurt subsequent marketingdecisions. For ex- depend on what kind of informationcomes to mind ample, the use of sales promotionsinvolving tempo- about the core brandin the extension context, whether rary price decreases may create or strengthena "dis- this informationis seen as suggestive of the type of count" association with the brand, with implications productor service that the brandextension would be, for customer loyalty and responses to future price and whetherthis informationis viewed as good or bad changes or non-price-orientedmarketing communi- in the extension context in comparisonwith compet- cation efforts. itors. Fifth, marketersshould employ trackingstudies to The salience or accessibility of the core brandas- measure consumer knowledge structuresover time to sociations depends on their strength in memory, as (1) detect any changes in the different dimensions of well as the retrieval cues provided by the extension brand knowledge and (2) suggest how these changes context. Some associations may be salient when con- might be related to the effectiveness of differentmar- sumers evaluate some extensions but not others. The keting mix actions. To the extent that a more precise relevance of the salient core brand associations de- assessment of customer-basedbrand equity is useful, pends, in part, on theirperceived similarityto the pro-

Customer-BasedBrand Equity/ 15

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions posed extensionproduct or service (Feldmanand Lynch implications, may be especially likely when the ex- 1988). When overall similarityis high, consumersare isting associations for the core brandare alreadyfairly more likely to base their extensionevaluations on their weak. For example, the successful introductionof the attitudetoward the core brand(Boush and Loken 1991; Miller Lite beer in the U.S. may have accentuated Boush et al. 1987; Herr, Farquhar,and Fazio 1990). perceptionsof the flagship Miller High Life beer as a Overall similarityjudgments could be made in differ- "less hearty"beer because thatperception had already ent ways (Loken and Ward 1990), though researchers been created in consumers' minds by its clear bottle typically assume that they are a function of salient (in contrast to Budweiser's dark bottle). As another shared associations between the core brand and the example of a potential dilution effect, successful ex- extension product category. These similarity judg- tensions for brands with an exclusivity and prestige ments could be based on product-relatedattributes, as image that effectively broadenthe target marketmay well as non-product-relatedattributes such as user type produce negative feedback effects on the brandfrom or usage situation (Bridges 1990; Park, Milberg, and members of the original consumer franchise who re- Lawson 1991). Whenoverall similarity is not very high, sent the market expansion. For example, the intro- consumers are more likely to consider specific attri- duction of the lower priced Cadillac Cimaron model butes and benefits involved. If relevant, the favora- is thought to have led to declines in image and sales bility of inferredattribute and benefit beliefs will de- for the entire Cadillac division (Yovovich 1988). pend on how they are valued in the extension context. Thoughthese differenttypes of dilutioneffects may Though these evaluationswill generally correspondto occur, multiple productor service extensions may not the favorability of the core brand associations, they be as harmfulto certain abstractassociations such as can differ, and in fact be negative, even if the core brandattitudes and perceived quality. In other words, brandassociations themselves are positive (Aaker and although the brand may not have the same specific Keller 1990). Moreover, even if positive attributeand product or service meaning because of multiple ex- benefit associations for the core brand lead to infer- tensions, consumers may still see the brand as rep- ences of positive brand extension associations, in- resenting a range of productsor services of a certain ferrednegative associationsmay still emerge (Bridges quality. 1990). Finally, when overall similarity is very low, An unsuccessfulbrand extension, in contrast, can consumer evaluations also will be very low. harmthe core brandimage by creatingundesirable as- When multiple product or service extensions are sociations. Such effects are most likely when there is associated with the brand,the congruenceamong their little difference between the originalbrand and the ex- associations becomes an importantdeterminant of the tension. For example, Sullivan (1990) conducted an consistency and cohesiveness of the brand image. It econometric analysis that showed how the perceived is often argued that an extension can help the core "suddenacceleration" problem of Audi's 5000 model brandimage by improvingthe favorabilityand strength "spilled over" and reduced demand for its 4000 and of associations and clarifying the business definition Quattromodels. RoedderJohn and Loken (1990) found and core benefits for the brand. Aaker (1991) claims thatperceptions of qualityfor a core brandin the health that brand extensions helped to fortify the brand im- and beauty aids area decreased with the hypothetical ages of WeightWatchers and Sunkist.Keller and Aaker introductionof a lower quality extension in a similar (1992) found that the successfulintroduction of a brand productcategory (i.e., shampoo). Quality perceptions extension improved evaluations of a core brand that of the core brandwere unaffected, however, when the originally was perceived to be of only averagequality, proposed extension was in a dissimilar productcate- although in their research setting consumers did not gory (i.e., facial tissue). Similarly, Keller and Aaker have strongly held attitudestoward the core brandand (1992) found that unsuccessful interveningextensions the company adopted a family brandingstrategy that in dissimilar product categories did not affect evalu- raised the salience of its name (and thus perceptions ations of the core brand (also see Romeo 1990). of its credibility). In summary, marketersshould evaluate potential It has also been argued that successful brand ex- extension candidatesfor their viability and their feed- tensions may potentially harm the core brand image back effects on core brand image by (1) identifying if they weaken existing associations in some way. If possibleextension candidates on the basis of core brand a brand becomes associated with a disparate set of associations (especially with respect to brand posi- or products services, product category identification tioning and core benefits) and overall similarityof the and the correspondingproduct associations may be- extension to the brand, (2) evaluating extension can- come less strong. For example, Pepperidge Farm, didate potentialby measuringthe salience, relevance, and Scott Cadbury, Paper have been accused of and favorabilityof core brandassociations in the pro- "overextending"by introducing too disparate prod- posed extension context and the favorability of any ucts. Dilution effects, with potentially adverse profit inferred associations, and (3) considering the exten-

16 / Journalof Marketing,January 1993

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions sion's potentialfeedback effects on the core brandim- term view of marketing a brand; specifying the de- age and the favorability, strength, and uniqueness of sired consumer knowledge structuresand core bene- core brand associations. fits for a brand; considering a wide range of traditional and nontraditionaladvertising, promotion, and other marketing options; coordinatingthe marketing Discussion options that are chosen; conducting tracking studies and controlled experiments;and evaluating potential Summary extension candidates. This article introducesthe concept of customer-based brandequity, defined as the differentialeffect of brand Future Research Directions knowledge on consumer response to the marketingof In the presentation of a conceptual framework of the brand. A brandis said to have positive (negative) customer-basedbrand equity, several constructs and customer-basedbrand equity if consumersreact more relationshipsare discussed. Consequently, additional (less) favorably to an element of the marketingmix research is necessary both to refine this framework for the brandthan -heydo to the same marketingmix and to suggest other implicationsfor marketingstrat- element when it is attributedto a fictitiously named egies and tactics. Undoubtedly, much previous re- or unnamed version of the product or service. Brand search may be useful in this effort. Because this re- knowledge is conceptualized according to an associ- search was most likely conducted with a different ative network memory model in terms of two com- purposein mind, however, additionalinsights may be ponents, brandawareness and brandimage (i.e., a set gained by considering it from the potentially broader of brand associations). Brand awareness consists of perspective of customer-basedbrand equity. In clos- brand recognition and brand recall. Brand associa- ing, some researchpriorities for building, measuring, tions are conceptualized in terms of their character- and managing customer-basedbrand equity are iden- istics by type (level of abstractionand qualitativena- tified. ture), favorability, and strength, and in terms of their Thereare severalimportant research questions about relationship with other associations by congruence, how to build customer-basedbrand equity. First, bet- competitive overlap (identification and uniqueness), ter choice criteriashould be establishedfor the brand and leverage.Customer-based brand equity occurs when identities (brand name, logo, and symbol). For ex- the consumer is aware of the brand and holds some ample, remarkablylittle empirical research has sys- favorable, strong, and unique brand associations in tematically examined brand name considerations as memory. The differenttypes of customer-basedbrand they pertainto enhancingbrand awareness and build- equity are discussedby consideringthe effects of these ing favorable, strong, and unique brandassociations. dimensions of brandknowledge on brandloyalty and Such research should recognize the numeroustrade- consumer response to product, price, promotion, and offs in choice criteria by suggesting when certain distributionstrategies. characteristicsof the brand identities should be em- The article also explores some specific aspects of phasized. For example, memory retrieval consider- this conceptualizationby considering how customer- ations that arise from associative strengthand part-list based brand equity is built, measured, and managed. cueing theories in psychology imply that a meaning- brand Building equity requirescreating a familiarbrand ful, "suggestive"brand name may facilitate initial po- name and a positive brandimage-that is, favorable, sitioning, but a nonsuggestive or neutralbrand name and strong, unique brand associations. Strategies to may more effectively accommodate later reposition- build customer-based brand equity are discussed in ing. Supportof this hypothesiswould imply that firms terms of both the initial choice of the brandidentities may be better off adopting more flexible branding (brand name, logo, and symbol) and how the brand strategies, using more neutral brand names, if they identities are supported by and integrated into the anticipateneeding to repositionthe brandlater. In de- marketing program. Two basic approaches to mea- veloping contingency-basedchoice criteria,it also will suring customer-basedbrand equity are outlined. The be necessary to clarify the roles of variousbrand iden- indirect approachmeasures brand knowledge (brand tities by consideringmore explicitlyhow brandnames, awareness and elements of brandimage) to assess the logos, symbols, slogans, and other trademarkscan sources of brand potential equity. The direct approach contribute differentially to building customer-based measures the effects of the brandknowledge on con- brandequity. This line of researchcould consider vi- sumer response to elements of the marketingmix. Ex- sual and verbalproperties of these brandidentities and amples of both types of approachesare provided. Fi- how they might affect brand awareness and the fa- six for nally, guidelines the managementof customer- vorability, strength, and uniqueness of brand associ- based brand equity are discussed. These guidelines ations. the of a emphasize importance taking broadand long- In terms of understandinghow the supportingmar-

Customer-BasedBrand Equity / 17

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions keting program builds customer-basedbrand equity, consistent and cohesive brandimage? This line of re- two particularresearch directions could be pursued. search should clearly examine how traditional and First, factorsinfluencing the favorability,strength, and nontraditionalmarketing options interact. Effective uniquenessof brandassociations, a focus of much past strategies for integrating marketing communications research, should continue to be explored, but along in terms of advertising, promotion, publicity, direct several different lines. Are certain types of associa- marketing,and package design are especially needed. tions inherently more favorable, stronger, or unique For example, how can advertisingbe coordinatedacross in memory?Which types of associations are more eas- broadcastand printmedia to enhancebrand awareness ily created by a particularmarketing or communica- and strengthen brand associations? These research tion mix element?Which types of associationsare more studies might consider memory principles and theo- likely to influence consumer response with respect to ries of encoding and retrieval. a particularmarketing mix element? Finally, what are Also, how should the consistency and cohesive- the tradeoffs involved in creating favorable, strong, ness of a brandimage be managedover consumerseg- and unique brand associations? For example, it was ments(including geographic boundaries) and over time? suggested previously that benefits can be more mem- A diffuse brandimage with weaker and less favorable orable than attributeinformation, but attributesmay brand associations may be particularlyevident when have to be communicatedto persuadeconsumers and a brand attempts to reposition itself (e.g., switching create favorable benefit associations. It was also sug- to a new targetmarket) (Heckler, Keller, and Houston gested above that non-product-relatedor image attri- 1992). Are there ways in which a brandimage can be butes, such as user type or usage situation, may create "flexible" and appeal to different consumer seg- uniqueassociations, but undersome circumstancesthey ments? To manage the brandimage better over time, may not be favorably received or strongly linked to more precise guidelines as to the "indirect"effects of the brand in memory. current marketing activity on the success of future Second, the costs and benefits of leveraging sec- marketing activity are needed-for example, by ondary associations should be explored. For example, achieving a betterunderstanding of how brandknowl- how and underwhat conditions should a firm increase edge influences consumer response. the salience of source factorsrelated to the brand(i.e., Finally, broader implications of customer-based the company, countryof origin, and distributionchan- brand equity should be explored by considering ag- nel)? All of these source factors have their own set of gregation issues associated with brandknowledge ef- associations. How do consumers merge or combine fects on marketsegments or the customerfranchise as these associations with other brand associations? In a whole, as opposed to effects on an individualcon- other words, how do these source and brand images sumer. An aggregate analysis also could consider the interact?Another importantissue is when and how a implicationof customer-basedbrand equity for sales, brandshould attemptto become associated with a par- market share, and profits. This more extended anal- ticularperson or event. For example, Rossiterand Percy ysis should consider aspects of the company (e.g., its (1987) offer the following criteriafor choosing a pre- strengthsand weaknesses) and the competitive nature senter in advertising:(1) visibility, (2) credibility (ex- of its markets. Similarly, it may also be useful to in- pertise and objectivity), (3) attraction(likability and corporatesome of the conceptsthat relateto customer- similarity), and (4) power. These criteria could be based brand equity to address other management adaptedto address when and how a brandshould be- questions pertainingto branding-for example, to de- come identified with an event. velop a financially based conceptualizationof brand One importantresearch priority is to develop valid equity. benchmarks for the direct approach to measuring customer-basedbrand equity-that is, plausible descriptions of the relevant activity (advertising, pro- Conclusions motion, product, pricing, etc.) with no or fictitious The goal of this article is to present a conceptual brandidentification. Another useful contributionwould framework that would provide useful structure for be to design efficient and effective approachesto con- managersdeveloping brandstrategies and researchers ducting tracking studies. This would entail consider- studying brandequity. In particular,the article builds ing the pros and cons of different qualitative and a theoreticalfoundation based on past researchin con- quantitative approaches to measuring brand knowl- sumer behavior that should be helpful in addressing edge of consumers. some of the new challenges in developing brandstrat- Several research questions are relevant for man- egies that have arisen because of changes in the mar- aging customer-based brand equity. What strategies keting environment (e.g., from the proliferationof are effective in creatingstrong brand associations? How brand extensions and the growth of new, alternative can different marketingmix elements be integratedto promotionaland media alternatives). create strong and congruent brand associations and a Though many of the ideas expressed in this con-

18 / Journalof Marketing,January 1993

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ceptual framework may be familiar to managers, its marketers to take better short-term and long-term mar- value is in integrating these various notions to provide keting actions. Moreover, this framework may also a more comprehensive picture of how marketers can suggest some considerations that have been otherwise create value for a brand. For example, marketers may overlooked. Thus, this broader context can help man- agree that they should take a broad and long-term view agers can make more insightful and informed brand of marketing decisions for a brand, but how they should decisions. do so may not be obvious. By recognizing that mar- For researchers, the value of the framework is in keting activity can potentially enhance or maintain suggesting areas where managerial guidance is needed consumers' awareness of the brand or the favorability, but academic guidelines are currently lacking. As sug- strength, and uniqueness of various types of brand as- gested by the large number of suggested future re- sociations, the customer-based brand equity frame- search directions identified, much work needs to be work may provide the perspective that will enable done.

REFERENCES

Aaker, David A. (1982), "Positioning Your Product," Busi- Paul Marsh (1989), Accounting for Brands. London: Lon- ness Horizons, 25 (May/June), 56-62. don Business School and the Institute for Chartered Ac- (1991), Managing Brand Equity. New York: The countants in England and Wales. Free Press. Berger, Ida E. and Andrew A. Mitchell (1989), "The Effect and Alexander Biel, eds. (1992), Building Strong of Advertising on Attitude Accessibility," Journal of Con- Brands. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. sumer Research, 16 (December), 280-8. and George S. Day (1986), Marketing Research, Bettman, James R. (1979), An Information Processing Theory 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. of Consumer Choice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Pub- and Kevin Lane Keller (1990), "Consumer Eval- lishing Company. uations of Brand Extensions," Journal of Marketing, 54 (1986), "Consumer Psychology," Annual Review (January), 27-41. of Psychology, 37, 257-89. Ajzen, Icek and Martin Fishbein (1980), Understanding Atti- and C. Whan Park (1980), "Effects of Prior tudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, Knowledge and Experience and Phase of the Choice Pro- NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. cess on Consumer Decision Processes: A Protocol Analy- Alba, Joseph W. and Amitava Chattopadhyay (1985a), "The sis," Journal of Consumer Research, 7 (December), 234- Effects of Context and Part-Category Cues on the Recall of 48. Competing Brands," Journal of Marketing Research, 22 , Deborah Roedder John, and Carol A. Scott (1986), (August), 340-9. "Covariation Assessment by Consumers," Journal of Con- and (1985b), "The Effects of Part-List sumer Research, 13 (December), 316-26. Cuing on Attribute Recall: Problem Framing at the Point and Mita Sujan (1987), "Effects of Framing on of Retrieval," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 12, Evaluation of Comparable and Noncomparable Alternatives ElizabethC. Hirschmanand Morris B. Holbrook, eds. Provo, by Expert and Novice Consumers," Journal of Consumer UT: Association for Consumer Research, 410-13. Research, 14 (September), 141-54. and (1986), "Salience Effects in Brand Blattberg, Robert C. and KennethJ. Wisniewski (1989), "Price- Recall," Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (November), Induced Patterns of Competition," Marketing Science, 8 363-9. (Fall), 291-309. and J. Wesley Hutchinson (1987), "Dimensions of Boush, David M. and Barbara Loken (1991), "A Process Consumer Expertise," Journal of Consumer Research, 13 Tracing Study of Brand Extension Evaluations," Journal of (March), 411-53. Marketing Research, 28 (February), 16-28. and John G. Lynch, Jr. (1991), , Shannon Shipp, Barbara Loken, Ezra Gencturk, and "Memory Decision Making," in Handbook of Con- Susan Crockett, Ellen Kennedy, Betty Minshall, Dennis sumer Theory and Research, Harold H. Kassarjian and Misurell, Linda Rochford, and Jon Strobel (1987), "Affect Thomas S. Robertson, eds. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pren- Generalization to Similar and Dissimilar Brand Exten- tice-Hall, Inc., 1-49. sions," Psychology and Marketing, 4 (3), 225-37. Allison, Ralph and Kenneth P. Uhl (1964), "Influences of Beer Bridges, Sheri (1990), "A Schema Unification Model of Brand Brand Identification on Taste Perception," Journal of Mar- Extensions," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Graduate 2 keting Research, (August), 36-9. School of Business, Stanford University. John R. The Anderson, (1983), Architecture of Cognition. Burke, Raymond R. and Thomas K. Srull (1988), "Compet- MA: Harvard Cambridge, University Press. itive Interference and Consumer Memory for Advertising," J. Baker, William, Wesley Hutchinson, Danny Moore, and Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (June), 55-68. Prakash Nedungadi (1986), "Brand Familiarity and Adver- Chaiken, Shelley (1986), "The Heuristic Model of Persua- Effects on the Evoked Set tising: and Brand Preferences," sion," in Social Influence: The Ontario Symposium, Vol. in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 13, Richard J. 4, Mark P. Zanna, E. Tory Higgins, and C. P. Herman, Lutz, ed. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, eds. Hillsdale, NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 637-42. Chattopadhyay, Amitava and Joseph W. Alba (1988), "The Barwise, Patrick, ChristopherHigson, Andrew Likierman, and Situational Importance of Recall and Inference in Con-

Customer-BasedBrand Equity/ 19

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions sumer Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Green, Paul E. and V. Srinivasan (1978), "Conjoint Analysis 15 (June), 1-12. in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Collins, Allan M. and Elizabeth F. Loftus (1975), "A Spread- Consumer Research, 5 (September), 102-23. ing Activation Theory of Semantic Processing," Psycho- and (1990), "Conjoint Analysis in Con- logical Review, 82, 407-28. sumer Research: New Developments and Directions," Craik, Fergus I. M. and Robert S. Lockhart (1972), "Levels Journal of Marketing, 54 (October), 3-19. of Processing: A Framework for Memory Research," Jour- and Yoram Wind (1975), "New Ways to Measure nal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-84. Consumers' Judgments," Harvard Business Review, 53 and Endel Tulving (1975), "Depth of Processing (July/August), 107-17. and the Retention of Words in Episodic Memory," Journal Gregg, Vernon H. (1976), "Word Frequency, Recognition, and of Experimental Psychology, 104 (3), 268-94. Recall," in Recall and Recognition, John Brown, ed. Lon- Cohen, Joel B. and Kanul Basu (1987), "Alternative Models don: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. of Categorization: Towards a Contingent Processing Heckler, Susan, Kevin Lane Keller, and Michael J. Houston Framework," Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (March), (1992), "The Effects of Brand Repositioning on Ad Re- 455-72. call," working paper, Karl Eller School of Management, Day, George S., Allan D. Shocker, and RajendraK. Srivastava University of Arizona. (1979), "Customer-Oriented Approaches to Identifying Herr, Paul M., Peter H. Farquhar,and Russell H. Fazio (1990), Product-Markets," Journal of Marketing, 43 (Fall), 8-19. "Extending Brand Equity to New Categories," working pa- Dick, Alan, Dipankar Chakravarti, and Gabriel Biehal (1990), per, Graduate School of Business, Indiana University. "Memory-Based Inferences During Consumer Choice," Hertel, Paula T. (1982), "Remembering Reactions and Facts: Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (June), 82-93. The Influence of Subsequent Information," Journal of Ex- Dobni, Dawn and George M. Zinkhan (1990), "In Search of perimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, Brand Image: A Foundation Analysis," in Advances in 8 (6), 513-29. Consumer Research, Vol. 17, Marvin E. Goldberg, Gerald Herzog, H. (1963), "Behavioral Science Concepts for Ana- Gorn, and Richard W. Pollay, eds. Provo UT: Association lyzing the Consumer," in Marketing and the Behavioral for Consumer Research, 110-19. Sciences, Perry Bliss, ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc., Dolan, Carrie (1985), "Concocting Zingy New Names Starts 76-86. Turning Into a Business," Wall Street Journal. Hoch, Stephen J. (1984), "Availability and Interference in Erickson, Gary M., Johny K. Johansson, and Paul Chao (1984), Predictive Judgment," Journal of Experimental Psychol- "Image Variables in Multi-Attribute Product Evaluations: ogy: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10 (October), 629- Country-of-Origin Effects," Journal of Consumer Re- 62. search, 11 (September), 694-9. Hong, Sung-Tai and Robert S. Wyer (1989), "Effects of Farquhar, Peter H. (1989), "Managing Brand Equity," Mar- Country-of-Origin and Product Attribute Information on keting Research, 1 (September), 24-33. Product Evaluation: An Information Processing Perspec- Fazio, Russell H. (1987), "Category-Brand Associations and tive," Journal of ConsumerResearch, 16 (September), 175- Their Activation From Memory," unpublishedreport, Ogilvy 87. Center for Research and Development, San Francisco, CA. and (1990), "Determinants of Product , Martha C. Powell, and Carol J. Williams (1989), Evaluation: Effects of the Time Interval Between Knowl- "The Role of Attitude Accessibility in the Attitude and Be- edge of a Product's Countryof Origin and InformationAbout havior Process," Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (De- Its Specific Attributes," Journal of Consumer Research, 17 cember), 280-8. (December), 277-88. , David M. Sanbonmatsu, Martha C. Powell, and Houston, Michael J., Terry L. Childers, and Susan E. Heckler Frank R. Kardes (1986), "On the Automatic Activation of (1987), "Picture-Word Consistency and the Elaborative Attitudes," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Processing of Advertisements," Journal of Marketing Re- 50 (February), 229-38. search, 24 (November), 359-69. and Mark P. Zanna (1981), "Direct Experiences Hoyer, Wayne D. and Steven P. Brown (1990), "Effects of and Attitude-Behavior Consistency," in Advances in Ex- BrandAwareness on Choice for a Common, Repeat-Purchase perimental Social Psychology, Vol. 14, Leonard Berkowitz, Product," Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (September), ed. New York: Academic Press, Inc., 161-202. 141-8. Jack M. Feldman, and John G. Lynch, Jr. (1988), "Self- Huber, Joel and John McCann (1982), "The Impact of Infer- Generated Validity and Other Effects of Measurement on ential Beliefs on Product Evaluations," Journal of Market- Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior," Journal of Ap- ing Research, 18 (November), 428-41. plied Psychology, 73 (August), 421-35. Isen, Alice M. (1992), "The Influence of Positive Affect on Geraldine Fennell, (1978), "Consumer's Perceptions of the Cognitive Organization: Some Implications for the Influ- Product-Use Situation," Journal of Marketing, 42 (April), ence of Advertising on Decisions About Products and 38-47. Brands," in Advertising Exposure, Memory, and Choice, Fishbein, Martin and Icek Ajzen (1975), Belief, Attitude, In- Andrew A. Mitchell, ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum tention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Re- Associates, in press. search. MA: Reading, Addison-Wesley Publishing Com- Jacoby, Jacob and David Mazursky (1984), "Linking Brand pany. and Retailer Images-Do the Potential Risks Outweigh the T. and Ruth Ann Ford, Gary Smith (1987), "Inferential Be- Potential Benefits?" Journal of Retailing, 60 (2), 105-22. liefs in Consumer Evaluations: An Assessment of Alter- , Jerry C. Olson, and Rafael A. Haddock (1971), native Processing Strategies," Journal of Consumer Re- "Price, Brand Name, and Product Composition Character- 14 363-71. search, (December), istics as Determinants of Perceived Quality," Journal of B. Gardner, Burleigh and Sidney J. Levy (1955), "The Prod- Applied Psychology, 55 (December), 570-9. uct and the Harvard Business Brand," Review, 33 (March- , George J. Syzabillo, and Jacqeline Busato-Schach 33-9. April), (1977), "InformationAcquisition Behavior in Brand Choice

20 / Journalof Marketing,January 1993

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Situations," Journal of Consumer Research, 3 (4), 209-16. That Influence Consumers' Evaluations of Brand Exten- Johnson, Michael D. (1984), "Consumer Choice Strategies for sions," working paper, Karl Eller School of Management, Comparing Noncomparable Alternatives," Journal of Con- University of Arizona. sumer Research, 11 (December), 741-53. MacKenzie, Scott B. (1986), "The Role of Attention in Me- Kahle, Lynne R. and Pamela M. Homer (1985), "Physical At- diating the Effect of Advertising on Attribute Importance," tractiveness of the Celebrity Endorsor: A Social Adaptation Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (September), 174-95. Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, 11 (4), 954- Maltz, Eliot (1991), "Managing Brand Equity: A Conference 61. Summary," Report #91-110. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Katz, Daniel (1960), "The Functional Approach to the Study Science Institute. of Attitudes," Public Opinion Quarterly, 24 (Summer), 163- Maslow, Abraham H. (1970), Motivation and Personality, 2nd 204. ed. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. Keller, Kevin Lane (1987), "Memory Factors in Advertising: McCracken, Grant (1989), "Who Is the Celebrity Endorsor? The Effect of Advertising Retrieval Cues on Brand Eval- Cultural Foundations of the Endorsement Process," Journal uations," Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (December), of Consumer Research, 16 (December), 310-21. 316-33. Miller, K. E. and J. L. Ginter (1979), "An Investigation of (1991a), "Cue Compatibility and Framing in Ad- Situational Variation in Brand Choice Behavior and Atti- vertising," Journal of Marketing Research, 28 (February), tude, " Journal of Marketing Research, 16 (February), 111- 42-57. 23. (1991b), "Memory and Evaluation Effects in Com- Myers, James H. and Allan D. Shocker (1981), "The Nature petitive Advertising Environments," Journal of Consumer of Product-Related Attributes," in Research in Marketing, Research, 16 (March), 436-76. Vol. 5, Jagdish Sheth, ed. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc., (1992), "Memory Retrieval Factors and Advertis- 211-36. ing Effectiveness," in Advertising Exposure, Memory, and Myers-Levy, Joan (1989), "The Influence of a Brand Name's Choice, Andrew A. Mitchell, ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Association Set Size and Word Frequency on Brand Mem- Erlbaum Associates, in press. ory," Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (September), 197- and David A. Aaker (1992), "The Effects of Se- 207. quential Introduction of Brand Extensions," Journal of and Alice M. Tybout (1989), "Schema Congruity Marketing Research, 29 (February), 35-50. as a Basis for Product Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Kotler, Philip H. (1991), Marketing Management: Analysis, Research, 16 (June), 39-54. Planning, and Control, 8th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Nedungadi, Prakash (1990), "Recall and Consumer Consid- Prentice-Hall, Inc. eration Sets: Influencing Choice Without Altering Brand Leuthesser, Lance, ed. (1988), "Defining, Measuring and Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (Decem- Managing Brand Equity: A Conference Summary," Report ber), 263-76. #88-104. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute. and Wesley Hutchinson (1985), "The Prototypi- Levitt, Theodore (1960), "MarketingMyopia," Harvard Busi- cality of Brands: Relationships With Brand Awareness, ness Review, 38 (July/August), 45-56. Preference and Usage," in Advances in Consumer Re- Levy, Sidney J. (1978), Marketing Behavior: Its Meaning for search, Vol. 12, Elizabeth C. Hirschman and Morris B. Management. New York: AMACOM. Holbrook, eds. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Re- (1981), "Interpreting Consumer Mythology: A search, 489-503. Structural Approach to Consumer Behavior," Journal of Newman, Joseph W. (1957), "New Insight, New Progress for Marketing, 45 (Summer), 49-61. Marketing," Harvard Business Review, 35 (November- (1985), "Dreams, Fairy Tales, Animals, and Cars," December), 95-102. Psychology and Marketing, 2 (2), 67-81. Olson, Jerry C. and Jacob Jacoby (1972), "Cue Utilization in Lockhart, Robert S., Fergus I. M. Craik, and Larry Jacoby the Quality Perception Process," in The Proceedings of the (1976), "Depth of Processing, Recognition, and Recall," Third Annual Conference of the Association for Consumer in Recall and Recognition, John Brown, ed., New York: Research, M. Venkatesan, ed. Iowa City, IA: Association John Wiley & Sons, Inc. for Consumer Research, 167-79. Loftus, Elizabeth F. and Gregory R. Loftus (1980), "On the Park, C. Whan, BernardJ. Jaworski, and Deborah J. Maclnnis Permanence of Stored Information in the Human Brain," (1986), "Strategic Brand Concept-Image Management," American Psychologist, 35 (May), 409-20. Journal of Marketing, 50 (October), 621-35. Barbara and Loken, James Ward (1990), "Alternative Ap- and V. Parker Lessig (1981), "Familiarity and Its to proaches Understanding the Determinants of Typical- Impact on Consumer Biases and Heuristics," Journal of Journal ity," of Consumer Research, 17 (September), 111- Consumer Research, 8 (September), 223-30. 26. , Sandra Milberg, and Robert Lawson (1991), Lutz, Richard J. (1991), "The Role of Attitude Theory in Mar- "Evaluationof Brand Extensions: The Role of ProductLevel in in keting," Perspectives Consumer Behavior, 4th ed., Similarity and Brand Concept Consistency," Journal of Harold H. and Kassarjian Thomas S. Robertson, eds. Glen- Consumer Research, 18 (September), 185-93. IL: view, Scott, Foresman and Company, 317-39. and Daniel C. Smith (1989), "Product-LevelChoice: John Howard Lynch, G., Jr., Mamorstein, and Michael Weigold A Top-Down or Bottom-Up Process?" Journal of Con- (1988), "Choices From Sets Including Remembered Brands: sumer Research, 16 (December), 289-99. Use of Recalled Attributes and Prior Overall Evaluations," Park, Chan-Su (1991), "Estimation and Prediction of Brand Journal Consumer of Research, 15 (September), 169-84. Equities Through Survey Measurement of Consumer Pref- and Thomas K. Srull (1982), "Memory and Atten- erence Structures," unpublished doctoral dissertation pro- tional Factors in Consumer Choice: Concepts and Research posal, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University. Journal Methods," of Consumer Research, 9 (June), 18- Petty, Richard E. and John T. (1986), Communi- 36. Cacioppo cation and Persuasion. New York: Springer-Verlag. Maclnnis, Deborah J. and Kent Nakamoto (1991), "Factors Plummer, Joseph T. (1985), "How Personality Makes a Dif-

Customer-BasedBrand Equity / 21

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ference," Journal of Advertising Research, 24 (6), 27-31. Stimuli: A Symbolic Interactionism Perspective," Journal Raaijmakers,J. G. W. and RichardM. Shiffrin (1981), "Search of Consumer Research, 10 (December), 319-29. of Associative Memory," Psychological Review, 88, 93- Srinivasan, V. (1979), "Network Models for Estimating Brand- 134. Specific Effects in Multi-Attribute Marketing Models," Rangaswamy, Arvind, Raymond Burke, and Terence A. Oliva Management Science, 25 (January), 11-21. (1990), "Brand Equity and the Extendibility of Brand Srivastava, Rajendra and Allan D. Shocker (1991), "Brand A on Its and Names," Working Paper No. 90-019, The Wharton School, Equity: Perspective Meaning Measurement," The of working paper, Graduate School of Business, University of University Pennsylvania. Texas at Austin. Ratcliff, Roger and Gail McKoon (1988), "A Retrieval Theory Srull, Thomas K. for the of in 95 385- (1984), "Methodological Techniques Priming Memory," Psychological Review, (3), of Person 408. Study Memory and Social Cognition," in Hand- book of Social Cognition, Vol. 2, Robert S. Wyer and Michael L. (1982), and Communication Ray, Advertising Thomas K. Srull, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum NJ: Inc. Management. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, Associates, 1-72. Al and Jack Trout The Battle Ries, (1979), Positioning: for Starr, Martin K. and Joel R. Rubinson (1978), "A Loyalty Your Mind. New York: McGraw Inc. Hill, Group Segmentation Model for Brand Purchasing Simula- Kim R. "Recall and Robertson, (1987), Recognition Effects tion," Journal of Marketing Research, 15 (August), 378- of Brand Name Imagery," Psychology and Marketing, 4 83. (1), 3-15. Sujan, Mita (1985), "Consumer Knowledge: Effects on Eval- (1989), "Strategically Desirable Brand Name Char- uation Strategies Mediating Consumer Judgments," Jour- acteristics," Journal of Consumer Marketing, 6 (Fall), 61- nal of Consumer Research, 12 (June), 31-46. 71. and James R. Bettman (1989), "The Effects of Brand Roedder John, Deborah and Barbara Loken (1990), "Diluting Positioning Strategies on Consumers' Brand and Category Brand Equity: The Impact of Brand Extensions," working Perceptions: Some Insights From Schema Research," Jour- paper, Carlson School of Management, University of Min- nal of Marketing Research, 26 (November), 454-67. nesota. Sullivan, Mary W. (1990), "Measuring Image Spillovers in Romeo, Jean B. (1990), "The Effect of Negative Information Umbrella BrandedProducts," Journal of Business, 63 (July), 309-29. on the Evaluation of Brand Extensions and the Family Edward M. Brand," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 18, Tauber, (1988), "Brand Leverage: Strategy for Growth in a Cost Controlled Journal Advertis- Rebecca H. Holman and Michael R. Solomon, eds. Provo, World," of 28 26-30. UT: Association for Consumer Research, 399-406. ing Research, (August/September), Endel Elements Lon- Rosch, Eleanor and B. Mervis Re- Tulving, (1983), of Episodic Memory. Carolyn (1975), "Family don: Oxford Press. semblances: Studies in the Internal Structure of Cate- University and Joseph Psotka (1971), "Retroactive Inhibition gories," Cognitive Psychology, 7 (October), 573-605. in Free Recall: Inaccessibility of Information Available in Roselius, Ted (1971), "Consumer of Risk Reduction Ranking Memory Store," Journal of Experimental Psychology, 87 Methods," Journal of Marketing, 35 (January), 56-61. (1), 1-8. John R. and Rossiter, Larry Percy (1987), Advertising and Ward, James and Barbara Loken (1986), "The Quintessential Promotion New York: Management. McGraw-Hill Book Snack Food: Measurement of Product Prototypes," in Ad- Company. vances in Consumer Research, Vol. 13, Richard J. Lutz, Russo, Edward J. and Eric J. Johnson (1980), "What Do Con- ed. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 126- sumers Know About Familiar Products?" in Advances in 31. Consumer Research, Vol. 7, Jerry C. Olson, ed. Ann Ar- Wentz, Laurel (1989), "WPP Considers Brand Valuation," bor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 417-23. Advertising Age, 24. Simon, Carol J. and Mary W. Sullivan (1990), "The Mea- Wilkie, William (1986), Consumer Behavior. New York: John surement and Determinants of Brand Equity: A Financial Wiley & Sons, Inc. Approach," working paper, Graduate School of Business, Wind, Yoram (1982), Product Policy: Concepts, Methods, and University of Chicago. Strategy. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Com- Simonson, Itamar, Joel Huber, and John Payne (1988), "The pany. Robert Jr. and Relationship Between Prior Knowledge and Information Wyer, S., Thomas K. Srull (1989), "Person and Order," Journal Consumer 14 Memory Judgment,"Psychological Review, 96 (1), 58- Acquisition of Research, 83. (March), 566-78. Yovovich, B. G. (1988), "WhatIs Your Brand Worth?" Smith, Daniel C. and C. Whan Park (1992), "The Effects of Really Adweek's Marketing Week 8), 18-21. Brand Extensions on Market Share and Effi- (August Advertising Zeithaml, Valarie (1988), "Consumer of Price, Journal 29 Perceptions ciency," of Marketing Research, (August), 296- Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and of 313. Synthesis the Evidence," Journal of Marketing, 52 (July), 2-22. Michael R. Solomon, (1983), "The Role of Products as Social Reprint No. JM571100

22 / Journalof Marketing,January 1993

This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:03:07 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions