COM 655 7-3 Analytical Paper #2
Brand strategies have both similarities and differences across various markets, although it seems that the volume of differences rather outweighs the similarities. Consider the L’Oreal Group (the redundant article is used for clarity) as an example of a business brand that showcases such differences. That the brand’s value proposition should be tailored very specifically to its target audience (Tybout & Calkins, 2011) is evident in the language used by its discrete sub-brands. For example, L’Oreal counts Armani’s cosmetics line in its “Luxe” portfolio; this is evident in the language used on its website, which is redolent with words and phrases such as “power” and “haute couture,” and images of celebrities. This strategy positions the sub-brand in the luxury category by speaking the same language its target audience would—or aspire to—speak. In contrast, their drugstore brand Maybelline uses language such as “streetwear,” “natural,” and “trending” to appear to Maybelline’s younger, less economically advantaged audience. Business markets must market their products to their target audiences, and so employ brand strategies that make the products of the brand relevant for each target audience segment.
With service brands, however, it is the experience that is important, not simply the product in use. Melia Hotels International revised their entire branding on the implications of this principle. In recognition that customer expectations form as a result of the quality of their interaction with the brand at each touch point, their branding focused first on their employees. Their market research had shown that Melia’s employees felt disconnected with the umbrella brand, resulting in lackluster work and half-hearted customer interaction. Melia also found that employees had no concept of what Melia stood for, meaning that they had little governance to fall back on when making decisions for other staff and for customers. Melia’s rebranding strategy built on the idea that frontline employees comprise the brand (Tybout & Calkins, 2011) much more significantly than the quality of the hotel rooms or other, more tangible products such as toiletries. Melia’s strategy was to train and empower their frontline staff to actively make decisions that put the customer first and rewarded the staff member for recognizing and responding to a customer need. Melia’s playbook included examples such as, “When you check in with your young children, I send a message to ensure that age-appropriate activities and crafts are put into your room before you get there, so that you can relax,” and “When you note that you have a food allergy, the kitchen and waitstaff are notified immediately so that you feel taken care of.” These examples highlight both the intangibles that defines service businesses (as in feeling relaxed and taken care of) as well as the power that frontline employees have to form an impression in the customer’s mind of what the brand entails.
Technology brands face different challenges altogether. In the first place, technology relies on innovation and new features and functionality to draw consumer attention, and the continued evolution thereof to keep consumer loyalty; branding is considered widely to consist of a fixed (or at least, not very mobile) set of principles and messaging (Tybout & Calkins, 2011), which at first may be considered as in direct contrast to the technology industry. Technology brands, therefore, are compelled to brand their purpose and their core values instead. Consider Apple’s various branding strategies as such an example. Apple is as guilty as other technology brands of increasing speed to market for their products, but their brand embodies the opposing ideas of democracy (technology for all in an age when IBM reserved computing power for the elite) and superiority (superior quality and technology justifying higher prices), and continues to proliferate their marketing messaging for all the products in their brand. Apple positions their core values as their brand, and then expands that branding (including the iconic monochromatic color scheme of most of their product line) to their products.
References
Tybout, A. M., & Calkins, T. (2011). Kellogg on Branding: The Marketing Faculty of The Kellogg School of Management [Kindle Version].