1 / 24

Arguments against brand positioning

Arguments against brand positioning. Maxwell Winchester & Dr. Byron Sharp. Marketing theory or marketing rubbish?. Most marketing theories developed on single cross-sectional studies Rarely replicated When replicated usually results in contrary findings e.g. Hubbard & Armstrong (1994)

herman
Télécharger la présentation

Arguments against brand positioning

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Arguments against brand positioning Maxwell Winchester & Dr. Byron Sharp

  2. Marketing theory or marketing rubbish? • Most marketing theories developed on single cross-sectional studies • Rarely replicated • When replicated usually results in contrary findings • e.g. Hubbard & Armstrong (1994) • Research & Development Initiative into Marketing (school of empirical generalisationalists) • Study marketing phenomena across MSOD • In different countries • Across different market structures

  3. Brand positioning • First appeared in the Advertising Age • Reis and Trout (1972) • Now in every marketing textbook • Seen as a fundamental aim of marketing • Yet not scientifically tested • Position brand in consumers’ minds • Make it the preferred brand for your brand’s target market

  4. The arguments… • Brand image varies with usage • Attributes that are prototypical are prototypical for every brand • Attitudes are fickle • Brand image remains stable over time • Consumers have repertoires of brands • There is no brand segmentation

  5. 1) Brand image varies with usage • Evaluative brand attributes vary with usage • e.g. “reliable”, “a bank I can trust”, “good value for money” • Users respond to an attribute more often than non-users

  6. 1) Overall scores

  7. 2) User & non-user response level

  8. 2) Response level and usage? • Big brands score higher than smaller brands and users respond to attribute more often than non-users • Usage drives brand image/brand attitudes? • This pattern has held up: • Different countries • Different market structures • Different industries • If positioning theory held, wouldn’t we expect • Smaller ‘niche’ brands to show significantly higher response levels on specific attributes (e.g. Volvo - safety) • This response level would drive usage

  9. 2) Attributes are protototypical consistently • Prototypicality comes from taxonomy • How we categorise things • In this case - brands • Attribute that is scored highly for one brand is so for others • E.g. “Up to date with technology”

  10. 2) Attributes scores & prototypicality

  11. 2) Prototypicality arguments… • This pattern has held up: • Different countries • Different market structures • Different industries • If positioning theory held, would we not expect brands to score highly on different attributes? • i.e. the ones they were positioned on

  12. 3) Attitudes are fickle/unstable • Only about half of the people who gave a particular attitudinal response on one occasion do so on the second interview

  13. 4) Brand Attitudes are fickle • Table of % of respondents who responded on 1st interview who also responded on 2nd interview

  14. 3) Attitudes are fickle/unstable • Individuals' responses are as-if random • But this variability cancels out at aggregate level - this is why so few researchers know about the individual variability • If positioning theory held, we would expect • Consistent responses to the attributes brands were positioned on • By the same respondents

  15. 4) Brand image remains stable over time • While we have seen at an individual level, image responses are fickle • At an aggregate level, over time, brand image remains stable in stable markets • Whether it 3 weeks or one year between interviews results tend to be relatively the same • These results are from a longitudinal study in the insurance market • Interviews were 3 months apart

  16. 4) Brand image @ t1 and t2

  17. 4) Brand image remains stable over time • We see little change in the aggregate results • So brand image does not change much • Except with changes in market share • If positioning theory held, we would expect • Dramatic changes in brand perceptions as different competitors re-positioned their brands in the marketplace

  18. 5) Consumers have repertoires of brands • Proponents of positioning theory believe: • If you position your brand well, people will prefer your brand over all of the others • But! • Consumers have brand repertoires • They are generally not loyal to one brand in repertoire markets • “Your buyers are buyers of other brands who occasionally buy you” • Professor Andrew Ehrenberg

  19. 6) There is no brand segmentation • Are Ford buyers different from GM buyers? • A fundamental argument provided by proponents of the positioning theory • Different brands are bought by different types of people • Study in Research & Development Initiative into Marketing • Ehrenberg & Kennedy • 42 industries, 200+ segmentation variables • Only minor differences found

  20. 6) There is no brand segmentation Av. MAD Credit Card 1 -3 3 3 Credit Card 2 -3 3 3 Credit Card 3 0 0 0 Credit Card n 2 -2 2 Av. MAD 2 2 2 . . . .. .. .. . . . .. .. ..

  21. 6) There is no brand segmentation • If positioning theory held… • We would expect to see large demographic, behavioural and psychographic differences between brands • This assumes we do not hold brand repertoires • This assumes we can target different competing brands at different segments • We are not saying that… • You cannot segment markets • Cat food is generally bought by cat owners!

  22. So where does this leave us ? • Evidence is not conclusive, BUT • You’ve seen a sufficient challenge to the tradition of brand positioning • Assumptions about the existence of 'ideal' or 'killer' attributes or image positions may be unfounded • Users of different brands think pretty much the same thing about their brands • Just because you tell consumers something, doesn’t mean they’ll act on it!

  23. An interesting study… • Romaniuk & Sharp (2000) found that: • Image perceptions are linked to future buying behaviour in a systematic and predictable manner • Mentioning a brand for any attribute means you are slightly more likely to keep buying it • Mentioning one particular brand attribute does not lead to purchase

  24. Where to from here? • We’re not saying that your brand can not be distinct from other brands • But we do compete in a competitive market • More scientific studies required • Such as those conducted as part of the Research and Development Initiative into Marketing • The marketing task does not seem to be about repositioning to some desirable spot • but rather is very much about taking into account what people already think of you • Building salience for your brand may be the answer • Perhaps brand positioning is marketing rubbish rather than marketing theory? • Replicate & extend • Longitudinal studies

More Related