Kybernetes Service branding: suggesting an interactive model of service brand development Hugo Skaalsvik Bjørn Olsen Article information: To cite this document: Hugo Skaalsvik Bjørn Olsen , (2014),"Service branding: suggesting an interactive model of service brand development", Kybernetes, Vol. 43 Iss 8 pp. 1209 - 1223 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/K-12-2013-0274 Downloaded on: 19 January 2015, At: 05:51 (PT) References: this document contains references to 79 other documents. To copy this document: [email protected] The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 170 times since 2014* Users who downloaded this article also downloaded: Narumon Kimpakorn, Gerard Tocquer, (2010),"Service brand equity and employee brand commitment", Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 24 Iss 5 pp. 378-388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08876041011060486 K.B. Saji, Bikram Jit Singh Mann, Mandeep Kaur, (2013),"Exploring branding strategies of FMCG, services and durables brands: evidence from India", Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 22 Iss 1 pp. 6-17 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10610421311298650 Leslie de Chernatony, Susan Segal-Horn, (2003),"The criteria for successful services brands", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37 Iss 7/8 pp. 1095-1118 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560310477681 Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 549148 [] For Authors If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 05:51 19 January 2015 (PT) are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. *Related content and download information correct at time of download. The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0368-492X.htm Interactive model Service branding: suggesting of service brand an interactive model of service development brand development Hugo Skaalsvik 1209 Department of Business Administration and Social Sciences, Harstad University College, Harstad, Norway, and Bjørn Olsen University of Nordland, Bodø, Norway Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to suggest an interactive model of service brand development. Design/methodology/approach – The design employed in the research represents a holistic and systemic approach to services branding and the methodology employed is conceptual desk research. Findings – The research findings encompass an interactive model of service brand components grounded on a systemic perspective. By building on services brand theory, three key actors constitute the components of the model, namely service leadership, service employees and customers. The findings also state how successful service branding may be obtained at the level of the individual service enterprise. Practical implications – The paper outlines a set of practical implications. For example, successful service brand development is obtained through a high degree of service orientation, customer involvement, an involvement model of service leadership and a motivated, committed and empowered workforce, particularly those employees at the frontline. Originality/value – The originality and value of the research rests on using systemic thinking in the development of an interactive model of services brand development Keywords Interactive service brand model, Service brand development, Service branding Paper type Conceptual paper Introduction Over time, a host of research has been carried out on product branding in manufacturing organisations, but as western economies have gradually moved into a service-dominated economy (Klaus and Maklan, 2007), a new stream of research has emerged, that of Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 05:51 19 January 2015 (PT) service branding (Gro¨nroos, 2007). Today, the service sector constitutes a substantial part of all economic activity, growth and employment in western economies (de Jong and Vermeulen, 2003). The high growth rate of services implies that the service sector, service industries and service enterprises are arenas with a great potential for further economic growth, development and employment (de Jong and Vermeulen, 2003; Martin and Horne, 1992, Oke, 2007; Vargo and Lusch, 2008). Gro¨nroos (2000, p. 11) terms the rapid growth of services as the “new economy” and in this economic atmosphere, the requirements for renewal, rapid changes and innovations in enterprises have substantially enhanced owing to competition, globalisation and internationalisation (Tidd et al., 2005; Trott, 2005). In these processes, the role of service brands has enhanced because possessing a strong brand is a means to differentiate a brand owner’s service offerings from those of its competitors (Aaker, 1996, 2002; Boyle, 2007). De Chernatony (2001) and McDonald Kybernetes Vol. 43 No. 8, 2014 et al. (2001) claim that a strong brand is a key organisational asset that needs to be pp. 1209-1223 r Emerald Group Publishing Limited utilised when positioning a service firm’s product offerings. Similarly, in relation to 0368-492X customers, Kayaman and Arasli (2007) argue that strong brands enable customers better DOI 10.1108/K-12-2013-0274 K to understand the intangible side of services. Gale (1994) goes further and introduces the 43,8 construct of a “power brand”, which is perceived as a unique, valuable and strategic resource (Urde, 1999) that is beneficial in order to formulate competitive branding strategies (Tidd et al., 2005). Nevertheless, the management of service brands can be a challenging and complex task in a service-dominated world (Weaver, 2007). A classic definition of a brand has been conceptualised by the American Marketing 1210 Association (AMA) as “a name, term, sign, symbol or any other feature that identifies a seller’s product or service as distinct from those of other sellers”. According to Gro¨nroos (2007), the AMA’s definition works well for physical products, but not for service products for two reasons. First, the definition does not take into account that services are processes (Andreassen, 2008; Hoffman and Bateson, 1997; Lovelock and Wright, 1999; Kandampully, 2007). Second, the definition excludes the role of customers as co-creators of services (Kay, 2006). According to de Chernatony and Segal-Horn (2001), the unique characteristics of services, those of intangibility, inseparability of production and consumption, heterogeneity of quality and perishability, influence the branding of services, particularly in relation to customers. The core argument is that production and consumption usually take place at the same time in services, which makes it difficult to assess the quality of a service in advance (Kandampully, 2007). In order to enhance precision, Gro¨nroos (2007, p. 330) suggests a brand definition that seems to be suitable for both physical and service products. He claims that “a brand is created continuously developing brand relationships, where the customer forms a differentiating image of a physical product, a service or a solution including goods, services, information and other elements, based on all kinds of brand contacts that the customer is exposed to”. The core of this relationship-oriented definition is the crucial role of customers in service brand development, which is grounded on an interactive perspective of branding (Brodie, 2009). The essence of the interactive perspective is that it “allows for a customer, employee and organisational perceptions of the service brand” (Brodie, 2009, p. 109). According to branding theory, a brand is created in the triangle between the company, its customers and employees (Schlager et al., 2011). Nevertheless, although different conceptual definitions of a brand have been suggested in the branding literature, the rationale for branding fast moving consumer goods and services is similar, as the essence is to leverage brand equity in order to build a strong relationship between the brand and its stakeholders, particularly customers (Berry, 2000). According to Tsiotsou and Ratten (2010, p. 535), brand equity concerns “the added Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 05:51 19 January 2015 (PT) value with which a brand endows a product and to the addition of the brand’s attributes including reputation, symbols, associations and name”, while Farquhar (1989) opines that brand equity encompasses the value that a brand name adds to a product. Similarly, Salzer-Morling and Strannegard (2004) perceive brand equity as consisting of four major asset categories: brand name awareness, brand loyalty, perceived quality and brand associations. Overall, branding is a strategy that aims to differentiate and position a business’s products and services from those of its competitors in order to provide added value to the brand owner and the customer (Aaker, 1996). While the extant academic