Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introducing multi-dimensional brand architecture: taking structure, market orientation and stakeholder alignment into account

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Brand Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Traditional research in brand architecture has primarily focused on bipolar, structural models describing brand constellations viewed from the brand owner’s angle of incidence. This paper further extends previous theorization within strategic brand management by offering the Conceptual Integrated Multi-dimensional Architecture (CIMA) model as an incorporation of existing research in brand architecture, arranged according to hierarchical structure, degree of collaboration with third parties and alignment with consumer perceptions. Traditional brand architecture is broadened using two additional dimensions—the level of intercompany partnerships and perceptional congruency between stakeholders—to produce a model that distinguishes between open and closed brand structures and includes the consumers’ perceptions as a mediator of brand strategy efficiency. The CIMA model implies that strategic brand management should consider the possible effects of third-party collaboration, in conjunction with consumer beliefs, on the efficiency of the pursued brand strategy and selected go-to-market approach. By including these two additional dimensions, marketing executives may find a more nuanced view of the potential challenges and obstacles that stand in the way of successful brand strategy execution. The paper is concluded by discussing the implications of this conceptual model and suggests a number of future research directions for brand architecture and brand portfolio management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aaker, D. 2004. Brand portfolio strategy: creating relevance, differentiation, energy, leverage and clarity. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aaker, D. 2011. Brand Relevance: making competitors irrelevant. USA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aaker, D. and Joachimsthaler, E. (2000) the brand relationship spectrum: The key to the brand architecture challenge. California Management Review.

  • Åsberg, P. 2009. The brand relationship cycle: Incorporating co-branding into brand architecture. IUP Journal of Brand Management 6(2): 45–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Åsberg, P. 2015. Perceived brand portfolios: How individual views hamper efficiency. Journal of Product & Brand Management 24(6): 610–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Åsberg, P. 2018. A dualistic view of brand portfolios: The company’s versus the customers’ view. Journal of Consumer Marketing 35(3): 264–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apple Inc. (2018) Q4 2017 unaudited summary data. https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/fy17-q4/Q4FY17DataSummary.pdf. Accessed 23 Mar 2018.

  • Baalbaki, S., and F. Guzmán. 2016. A consumer-perceived consumer-based brand equity scale. Journal of Brand Management 23(3): 229–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balmer, J., and M. Gray. 2003. Corporate brand: What are they? What of them? European Journal of Marketing 37(7/8): 972–997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barsalou, L.W. 1983. Ad-hoc categories. Memory and Cognition 11(3): 211–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biraghi, S., and R. Gambetti. 2013. Corporate branding: Where are we? A systematic communication-based inquiry. Journal of Marketing Communications 21(4): 260–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackett, T., and B. Boad. 1998. Co-branding the science of alliance. London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brexendorf, T.O., and K.L. Keller. 2017. Leveraging the corporate brand—the importance of corporate brand innovativeness and brand architecture. European Journal of Marketing 51(9/10): 1530–1551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carolino Sousa Santos Jr., E. 2018. Brand portfolio strategy and brand architecture: A comparative study. Cogent Business & Management 5(1): 1483465.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, D., A. Gilmore, C. Perry, and K. Gronhaug. 2001. Qualitative Marketing Research. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chailan, C. 2009. Brand architecture and brand portfolio: A clarification. EuroMed Journal of Business 4(2): 173–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Da Silveira, C., C. Lages, and C. Simoes. 2013. Reconceptualizing brand identity in a dynamic environment. Journal of Business Research 66(1): 28–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlstrom, R., and A. Nygaard. 2016. The Psychology of co-branding alliances: The business-to-business relationship outcomes of role stress. Psychology & Marketing 33(4): 267–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decker, C., and A. Baade. 2016. Consumer perceptions of co-branding alliances: Organizational dissimilarity signals and brand fit. Journal of Brand Management 23(6): 648–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desai, K.K., and K.L. Keller. 2002. The effects of ingredient branding strategies on host brand extendibility. Journal of Marketing 66(1): 73–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devlin, J. 2003. Brand architecture in services: The example of retail financial services. Journal of Marketing Management 19(9–10): 1043–1065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devlin, J., and S. McKechnie. 2008. Consumer perceptions of brand architecture in financial services. European Journal of Marketing 42(5/6): 654–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, S.P., C.S. Craig, and E.J. Nijssen. 2001. Integrating branding strategy across markets: Building international brand architecture. Journal of International Marketing 9(2): 97–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esbjerg, L., and T. Bech-Larsen. 2009. The brand architecture of grocery retailers: Setting material and symbolic boundaries for consumer choice. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 16: 414–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari, N.V. (2016). Annual report 2016. http://corporate.ferrari.com/sites/ferrari15ipo/files/2016_12_31_-_ferrari_nv_annual_report_0.pdf. Accessed 16 Mar 2018.

  • Flight, R., and K. Coker. 2016. Brand constellations: Reflections of the emotional self. Journal of Product & Brand Management 25(2): 134–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folkes, V. 1988. Recent attribution research in consumer behavior: A review and new directions. Journal of Consumer Research 14(4): 548–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabrielli, V., and I. Baghi. 2016. Brand architecture shift and corporate brand equity: An exploratory study. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 34(6): 777–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halkias, G. 2015. Mental representation of brands: A schema-based approach to consumers’ organization of market knowledge. Journal of Product & Brand Management 24(5): 438–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, J., Chung, S., and Sohn, Y. (2018) What’s in a name? The impact of subcategory salience on value perception and upgrade intention for multicategory products. Psychology & Marketing, pp 1–10.

  • Helmig, B., J. Huber, and P.S.H. Leeflang. 2008. Co-branding: The state of the art. Schmalenbach Business Review 60(4): 359–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, G.R., D. Iacobucci, and B.J. Calder. 1998. Brand diagnostics: Mapping branding effects using consumer associative networks. European Journal of Operational Research 111(2): 306–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, S., R. Ettenson, and D. Tyson. 2005. Achieving the ideal brand portfolio. MIT Sloan Management Review 46(2): 85–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, S., and C. Lederer. 2001. The infinite asset—Managing brands to build new assets. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, L., S. Fournier, and S. Srinivasan. 2016. Brand architecture strategy and firm value: how leveraging, separating, and distancing the corporate brand affects risk and return. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 44(2): 261–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ind, N., O. Iglesias, and S.J. Markovic. 2017. The co-creation continuum: From tactical market research tool to strategic collaborative innovation method. Journal of Brand Management 24: 310–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Intel Corporation (2016) Annual Report 2016. http://www.annualreports.com/HostedData/AnnualReports/PDF/NASDAQ_INTC_2016.pdf. Accessed 16 Mar 2018.

  • Jevons, C., M. Gabbott, and L. de Chernatony. 2005. Customer and brand manager perspectives on brand relationships: A conceptual framework. Journal of Product and Brand Management 14(5): 300–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joiner, C. 1998. Concept mapping in marketing: A research tool for uncovering consumers’ knowledge structure associations. Advances in Consumer Research 25: 311–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanitz, C., and C. Burmann. 2012. The challenge of pharmaceutical brand architecture: A theoretical analysis based on the brand architecture model (BAM). The Marketing Review 12(3): 309–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapferer, J.N. 1997. Strategic brand management. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapferer, J.N. 2004. The new strategic brand management. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, K.L. 1999. Designing and implementing branding strategies. The Journal of Brand Management 6(5): 315–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, K.L. 2003. Strategic brand management, 2nd ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, K.L. 2012. Understanding the richness of brand relationships: Research dialogue on brands as international agents. Journal of Consumer Psychology 22(2): 186–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, E., and F. Guzmán. 2016. Co-creation of brand identities: Consumer and industry influence and motivations. Journal of Consumer Marketing 33(5): 313–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, A.M., and G. Laczniak. 2016. Conceptualisations of the consumer in marketing thought. European Journal of Marketing 50(1/2): 166–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, N. 2003. Kill a brand, keep a customer. Harvard Business Review 81(12): 86–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laforet, S., and J. Saunders. 1994. Managing brand portfolios: How the leaders do It. Journal of Advertising Research 34(5): 64–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laforet, S., and J. Saunders. 2007. How brand portfolios have changed: A study of grocery suppliers brands from 1994 to 2004. Journal of Marketing Management 33(1–2): 39–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leuthesser, L., C. Kohli, and R. Suri. 2003. 2 + 2 = 5? A framework for using co-branding to leverage a brand. Journal of Brand Management 11(1): 35–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mann, B., and M. Kaur. 2013. Exploring branding strategies of FMCG, services and durables brands: Evidence from India. Journal of Product and Brand Management 22(1): 6–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingione, M. 2015. Inquiry into corporate brand alignment: A dialectical analysis and directions for future research. Journal of Product & Brand Management 24(5): 518–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, N., and L. Rego. 2009. Brand Portfolio Strategy and firm performance. Journal of Marketing 73(1): 59–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muylle, S., N. Dawar, and D. Rangarajan. 2012. B2B brand architecture. California Management Review 54(2): 58–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muzellec, L., and M. Lambkin. 2009. Corporate branding and brand architecture: A conceptual framework. Marketing Theory 9(1): 39–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olins, W. 1989. Corporate identity. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oswald, L. 2014. Marketing and semiotics, signs, strategies and brand value. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oswald, L. (2007) Semiotics and strategic brand management. http://www.csun.edu/~bashforth/098_PDF/Semiotic_branding.pdf. Accessed 11 Oct 2018.

  • Park, C.W., S.Y. Jun, and A.D. Shocker. 1996. Composite brand alliances: An investigation of extension and feedback effects. Journal of Marketing Research 33(4): 453–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petromilli, M., D. Morrison, and M. Million. 2002. Brand architecture: Building brand portfolio value. Strategy & Leadership 30(5): 22–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahman, K., and C. Areni. 2014a. Marketing strategies for services: Is brand architecture a viable way forward? Journal of Strategic Marketing 22(4): 328–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahman, K., and C. Areni. 2014b. Generic, genuine, or completely new? Branding strategies to leverage new products. Journal of Strategic Marketing 22(1): 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajagopal, R., and R. Sanchez. 2004. Conceptual analysis of brand architecture and relationships within product categories. Journal of Brand Management 11(3): 233–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, V., M. Agarwal, and D. Dahlhoff. 2004. How is manifest brand strategy related to the intangible value of a corporation? Journal of Marketing 68(4): 126–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, A.R., and R.W. Rueckert. 1994. Brand alliances as signals of product quality. Sloan Management Review 36(1): 87–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roedder John, D., B. Loken, K. Kim, and A. Basu Mongan. 2006. Brand concept maps: A methodology for identifying brand association networks. Journal of Marketing Research 43(4): 549–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roehm, M., and A. Tybout. 2006. When will a brand scandal spill over, and how should competitors respond? Journal of Marketing Research 43: 366–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sachgau, M. (2018) Porsche’s pivot toward the family pays off. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-15/porsche-s-pivot-toward-the-family-pays-off. Accessed 16 Mar 2018.

  • Serota, K., and M. Bhargava. 2010. Brand-usage networks: A demand side approach to brand architecture. Journal of Strategic Marketing 18(6): 451–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shah, P. 2017. Culling the brand portfolio: Brand deletion outcomes and success factors. Management Research Review 40(4): 370–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonin, B., and J. Ruth. 1998. Is a company known by the company it keeps? Assessing the spillover effects of brand alliances on consumer brand attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research 35(1): 30–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sjodin, H. (2005) Dirt!: An interpretive study of negative opinions about a brand extension, in E—European advances in consumer research (eds. Karin M. Ekstrom and Helene Brembeck), Association for consumer research, Vol. 7 92–96.

  • Stocchi, L., M. Wright, and C. Driesener. 2016. Why familiar brands are sometimes harder to remember. European Journal of Marketing 50(3/4): 621–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strebinger, A. 2004. Strategic brand concept and brand architecture strategy: A proposed model. Advances in Consumer Research 31: 656–661.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strebinger, A. 2014. Rethinking brand architecture: A study on industry, company- and product-level drivers of brand strategy. European Journal of Marketing 48(9/10): 1782–1804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turley, L., and P. Moore. 1995. Brand name strategies in the service sector. Journal of Consumer Marketing 12(4): 42–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uggla, H. 2006. The corporate brand association base. European Journal of Marketing 40(7/8): 785–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uggla, H. 2014. Make or buy the brand: Strategic direction of brand management. Strategic Direction 30(3): 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vallaster, C., and S. von Wallpach. 2013. An online discursive inquiry into the social dynamics of multi-stakeholder brand meaning co-creation. Journal of Business Research 66(9): 1505–1515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varadarajan, R., M. DeFanti, and P. Busch. 2006. Brand portfolio, corporate image, and reputation: Managing brand deletions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 34(2): 195–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S.L., and R.F. Lusch. 2004. Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing 68(1): 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Washburn, J.H., B.D. Till, and R. Priluck. 2000. Co-branding: brand equity and trial effects. Journal of Consumer Marketing 17(7): 591–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Industrial Economy and Management, School of Industrial Engineering and Management, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden

    Per Åsberg & Henrik Uggla

Authors
  1. Per Åsberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Henrik Uggla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Per Åsberg.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Åsberg, P., Uggla, H. Introducing multi-dimensional brand architecture: taking structure, market orientation and stakeholder alignment into account. J Brand Manag 26, 483–496 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-018-00147-1

Download citation

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-018-00147-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation