Читать книгу Financial Information and Brand Value - Yves-Alain Ach - Страница 13

The notion of “brand equity” emerged in the 1980s, as researchers tried to understand how brand competitive advantage merges. Park and Srinivasan (1994) define brand equity as the difference between the overall preference for the branded product and a utility value based on the estimate of the unbranded product. According to Ben Rached and Mennaï “brand equity provides value to the consumer. This value is based on cognitive psychology and is focused on the consumer’s cognitive processes” (Ben Rached and Mennaï 2009).

Changeur (2012) considers that, from an academic point of view, the comparison of different concepts and approaches to brand equity presents many conceptualizations, and that very different measures coexist, which largely contributes to confusion and a lack of structuring in this field. Thus, the author comes to the conclusion that “brand equity is not an isolated concept but a conceptual framework of brand value” (Changeur 2012). She states that brand equity is independent of product categories, in that it encompasses both core brands and umbrella brands and also measures the ability to transfer brand equity value to new product development.

This notion is completed by the definition proposed by Farquhar (1990), which consists of assimilating brand equity to added value brought about by the single-product brand, and by Leuthesser (1988), which states that all the associations and behavior of the brand’s consumers, the distribution channels and the company to which it belongs make it possible to achieve higher sales volumes and margins. Furthermore, Keller (2001) considers that the brand–consumer relationship, if properly understood, makes it possible to build a strong brand, an argument also put forward by Changeur (1999) in her thesis on brand territory and the measurement of brand associations. The aim is to define the meaning of all brand associations and to consider all responses that are assimilated to judgments and emotions. In this way, the link between brand equity and the brand–consumer relationship can be established.

Brand equity creates economic benefits for the company. Building a strong brand develops a major link with the consumer, which gives a measure of brand equity, according to the seminal work of Aaker (1994) and Keller (1993). Srinivasan (1979) demonstrated that the brand is independent of the product and has its own value. Brand equity helps to identify brand value for the consumer and also for the company. The link between the two is ensured by sales and the conquest of market share and, at the same time, by the company’s ability to maintain and increase its margin rate. In addition to the assessment of brand equity based on consumer perception, brand equity can also be estimated on the basis of financial and accounting concepts. To this extent, it is important to determine the value added by marketing development, which enables cost savings to be made based on previous experience, adding value to the brand and increasing product sales. Understandably, these two concepts are interrelated: if the company succeeds in creating a strong brand, then it will generate additional revenue through different channels.

The additional cash flows generated can be used to estimate financial brand value. The financial and accounting vision that can be derived from this is materialized from the notion of an “intangible asset”. We perceive that, just like any traditional asset, brand equity is composed of assets and liabilities that allow us to define it. These assets and liabilities are formed from the following five categories:

 – customer loyalty to the brand;

 – brand awareness;

 – perceived quality;

 – brand image;

 – any other assets related to the brand.

These five categories directly influence brand value. They can be ranked on a scale ranging from strong brand identification to weak brand identification. Measuring brand equity requires identifying the strength of the brand, or its weakness. The brand facilitates the purchasing act. The consumer has recorded a range of information about the products, and the brand can acquire a notoriety that will influence the consumer, to the extent that this notoriety reassures the consumer about the quality of the branded products. The brand image to which the consumer is attached makes them loyal. For the company, the stakes are high; the brand will have to ensure growth in turnover, provided that it succeeds at least in increasing the value of each of the five categories defined by Aaker (1994). The aim is to create value for both the consumer and the company. The aim is to give the consumer confidence in the purchase decision and to create satisfaction after the purchase, which will help to ensure the consumer’s interpretation of a good brand image. As for the company, it will create a business, ensuring the stability of its development, increasing, if successful, its sales, prices and margins and consolidating its competitive advantage.

Keller specifies that “customer-based brand equity is defined as the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand” (Keller 1993). This notion allows us to understand how consumers can be seduced by a brand. The author highlights two key elements of this process, namely the knowledge of the brand and the awareness or attention paid to the image. For Changeur and Dano (1998), it is a question of first estimating the level of strength associated with the brand in the consumer’s memory who initiates the purchasing act.

Branding associations are based on three fundamental dimensions: strength, favor and uniqueness. These three dimensions are crucial for the purchasing act. This work is complementary to that of Aaker (1994). The latter has developed three other characteristics: power, identification and universality. Thus, it is clear that Keller and Aaker were particularly interested in the criteria of consumer perception of the product. This approach, based on brand awareness criteria, makes it possible to approach brand value and the notion of “brand equity”.

Korchia (2001) took up the work of Aaker and Keller to measure consumer knowledge of brands by taking the typology of brand image further, into 15 categories; Aaker (1994) had developed 3 and Keller (1993) 11. It is understandable that 10 years later, this notion remains fundamental in the eyes of marketers. While marketers are interested in the consumer’s psychological perceptions that lead them to make a purchase, we will look at the link between the concept of “brand equity” and brand value. This concept allows us to understand the positioning of companies’ products in their preferred market and the objectives they follow in order to succeed in seducing the consumer. We understand that in this environment, the brand is the spearhead of this strategy. Thus, the consumer’s perception of the brand is of particular interest to marketers. This is why it is essential to be able to measure the effort made by the company to develop its brand.

Farquhar’s (1990) definition of brand equity is seminal in this regard, and brand equity could be defined as “the value added that a brand brings to a product”. The concept of “brand equity” makes it possible to define brand value, linked to the measurement of the marketing phenomena developed. Nevertheless, approaches in this area are heterogeneous. This heterogeneity was highlighted by Changeur (2002). It appears from Aaker’s (1994) work, based on cognitive psychology studies, that it is a set of perceptions that makes it possible to evaluate brand equity.

Keller (1993) has shown that brand equity is a combination of brand attention and strong, unique and positive brand associations stored in consumers’ memories. The objective is to measure the reaction of consumers to the marketing actions developed by brands. Other authors, such as Kamakura and Russel (1993, pp. 9–22) or Park and Srinivasan (1994), assume that all these brand associations form the basis of brand equity.

Park and Srinivasan (1994) consider, in a complementary way, that brand equity corresponds to an additional utility brought to the consumer by the brand, but that this utility is not linked to the evaluation of attributes and products. Other researchers have been interested in the interpersonal psychology of the consumer and have conducted studies on the consumer’s attachment to the brand, leading to a lasting emotional predisposition that conditions the consumer’s choice.

Feldwick (1996, pp. 85–104) and Martin and Brown (1991, pp. 431–438) conclude that brand performance resulting from brand equity is separable, by definition, from product performance, sustainable and independent of product categories. Apart from the attention paid to the brand by the consumer from the induced associations, which can potentially be strong, unique and positive, the utility recognized by the consumer to make their choice is one of the elements necessary to determine the strength of the brand on the market.

Today, the conceptual framework proposed by Aaker (1994) remains the most frequently used when dealing with the notion of “brand equity” with its various dimensions.

Shocker and Weitz (1988) considered that the brand is an intangible asset with financial value. For their part, Simon and Sullivan (1993, pp. 28–52) established that brand equity is the sum of current and future additional financial flows from sales of products directly related to the developed brand.

Figure 1.1. Definition of brand equity (based on Aaker (1994))

Lane and Jacobson (1995, pp. 63–77) measured the reactions of financial markets to the communication surrounding the launch or development of brands. In doing so, they looked at the effects of brand equity on firm development. They sought to determine whether there was a specific performance linked to the brand, and distinct from that, which the product could generate. The empirical analysis indicated that the reaction of financial markets was driven by the inherent leverage of brands and, particularly, by the interactivity and monotony of brand attitudes. Specifically, the question is whether the strength of the brand in the market allows for the development of additional financial flows due to the brand and, finally, whether a financial brand value can be realized that allows for the realization of the value of brand equity from the company’s perspective. The challenge is also to determine whether the investments made have made it possible to develop a brand in a sustainable manner.

1 1 Definition of the French term for brand, “marque”, Lamy droit économique, Éditions Lamy, Paris, 2012.

2 2 European Union (2019). Legislation. Official Journal of the European Union, vol. 62, 14 November.