|
在现代，经济市场的日益增长十分明显，与此同时，也面对着数不胜数的挑战,机遇、威胁,以及要求(科特勒和Pfoertsch,2006)。不断增长的科学技术，其他行业对于时尚市场的影响，人们更加追求实用性等等迫使人们普遍认为在某种程度上这就是发展趋势(福特,2005)。在当今，时装行业是一个十分复杂的行业，受很多因素的影响，其中一个因素就是“品牌形象”(所罗门&迈克尔,2009)。这些数字的因子,上面引用的变量可能会影响一个人对于时尚市场有关于无形和物质方面的看法。
此次研究的基本动机是为了分析消费者对于品牌形象感知的差异性，因此我们必须深入阐述和理解这两个重要的变量，首先是品牌形象其次是消费者的感知。接下来，我们将简要理解一下这些概念，这些会给之后的研究工作创造更多的机会。
文献综述--The Literature Review
品牌的定义--Defining Brand
品牌的名字，商标，标语，设计，这些组合在一起可以使消费者将卖家与与其他竞争者区分开来。(科特勒,1984,p442)
Growing Economies And Markets Marketing Essay
Ever growing economies and markets are evident in modern era, and at the same instance they provide numerous numbers of challenges, opportunities, threats, and demands (Kotler and Pfoertsch, 2006). Growing technology, impact of other industries on fashion market, the presence and availability of the desired, and many more factors have compelled today’s individual to think in a way which is consistent with the trends in the society(Ford, 2005). In such scenarios it becomes highly complicated to analyse contemporary developments in fashion market which are influenced (up to a certain extent) from various factors. One of such variable is the ‘brand image’ (Solomon & Michael, 2009). Out of these numbers of factor, the variable quoted above might have a strong influence on individual’s perception regarding intangible and materialistic aspects of fashion market.
To analyze such differentiation in consumer’s perception of brand image is the basic motive of this study. For the purpose two important variables in picture have to be elaborated and understood in depth. First is the brand image and other being the consumer’s perception. In upcoming section a brief understanding of these concepts will be developed to create further opportunities for the research work.
文献综述--The Literature Review:
品牌的定义--Defining Brand
“A name, a sign, symbol or design or combination of them intended to identify the goods and services of either one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate the from the competitors” (Kotler, 1984, p442), similarly
“A dynamic interface between an organisation’s actions and customer’s interpretations, a cluster of functional and emotional values which promise a particular experience” (Schultz and de Chernatony, 2002, p105), and more precisely
“Politicians, pop stars, sport and entertainment identities” (Jevons 2005, p118).
Putting it in simple terms, a word of mouth, a trust on a friend, goodwill in the market, an old heritage, a skill and many more that have an influence on individual in some way can be referred as to a brand (Coleridge, 2005). In above definitions three things can be seen in common. One the creation of the brand from marketer’s point of view; second a set of individual’s perception; and third the overall process of interaction between individual’s and marketer’s. Essentially this paper will concentrate on these three variables and will try to establish a logical understanding of the three.
De Chaernatony and McDonald (2003, p22) explain in a similar manner that intangible benefits, heritage and loyalty that is associated with a tangible asset lead to a creation of a brand. It was 1980’s that this was in attention of the marketers that financial benefits that are registered in the accounts are indirectly related to the brand image of the company. They also list this brand value of top ten brands(companies) in which Coca Cola hits on the top with 69.6bn $ followed by Microsoft, IBM, and GE on second, third and fourth place (Interbrand, 2002, sighted by De Chaernatony and McDonald, 2003).
With this ideology marketers associate their strategies, efforts, and vision to create a company or a product or a service as a brand. In this process there are many important things that have to be considered carefully. Foremost is argued as the user or the buyer (De Chaernatony and McDonald, 2003). They argue that “while marketers talk about branding efforts they are undertaking, they should never lose the sight that the final form of the brand is the mental evaluation held by the purchaser” (De Chaernatony and McDonald, 2003, p24). Thus there is definitely some component of consumer’s perception involved in creating a brand image (Coleridge, 2005). Accordingly they give their own definition of brand as
“A successful brand in an identifiable product service person or place augmented in such a way that the buyer or user perceives relevant, unique added values which math their needs more closely. Furthermore its success results from being able to sustain these added values in the face of competition” De Chaernatony and McDonald, 2003, p25).
Before discussing the other components of the process such as characteristics, contents, model etc it will be worth while to understand the existence of the brand itself. In following section some historical roots of the branding process are discussed.
品牌的演变--Evolution of the brand
Historically brand was defined as“To make indelibly as a proof of ownership, a sign of quality, or for any other purpose which can differentiate the commodity from any other commodity” (Oxford English Dictionary sighted by De Chaernatony and McDonald, 2003p 33)
The history of brand, as argued by many author is associated with the evolution of trademarks (see Miller & Muir 2004, Olins, Wally 2003, and Gregory, James 2003). They script that branding is the process in space of time that has been advent since ancient era. Though the importance of such advantages that a brand gives were being realised with the existence of industrial revolution (Gregory, 2003). In the ancient time, for example Greek and Roman retailers used a unique picture to predict (to the consumers) the product that they sell (Jevons, 2005). These pictures were thus an indication to consumers in the market regarding availability of the needed goods. Probably this was on of the marketing strategies of retailer to build up a relation with a consumer and make them loyal towards them (Jevons, 2005). Gradually with the space of time and understanding the complexities of the consumer acts in the market these pictures formulated into symbols that predicted the seller himself (Schmidt and et al, 2002). Now these symbols were not only associated with he product but also with the seller directly (Schmidt and et al, 2002). This was termed as a “shorthand device” indicating capability of the seller of selling a particular product (Davies, 1992).
Evidence can be found as the impressing these unique symbols by craftsmen’s on the goods produced. Gradually these symbols took the form of “Trademarks” (McEnally and et al, 1999). It shall be notified here that brand as a separate identity is not being relished by the sellers or the manufacturers up till this era. Rather these symbols or logos or picture were being used for a purpose(McEnally and et al, 1999). According to De Chaernatony and McDonald in these settings the brand was a mean to predict the sign of ownership and was a differentiating device for variety of products.
As the market grew, more suppliers were in existence, more retailers were in existence, altogether more goods were in production. The production by the manufactures made a differentiation between the qualities of the products. Not only the quality but, also the functions of the products were differentiated (Olins & Wally 2003). The goods were homogeneous but differentiated. These factors started impacting the manufacturer-Retailer relation. Manufacturer’s production thus increased rapidly depending on stoking the produced rather supplying to the retailer directly. Here comes the concept and importance of the wholesalers (McEnally and et al, 1999). This was the era before 1900 and the concept of branding was not explicitly understood by the manufacturers. In this era the brand is referred as to a functional device (De Chaernatony and McDonald).
With the hit of industrial revolution in 19th century, the levels of consumer demand, rate of technological development, large scale production, and profitability growth increased to an extent that manufacturers became highly competitive in the market to survive (Olins & Wally 2003). With these developments the relevance of the wholesalers was reduced as the manufacturer established themselves as a separate identity in the market (LeBlanc & Turley, 1994. Protection of the investments was the concern of the manufacturers and thus patenting their existence became a prominent activity (LeBlanc & Turley,1994). It was 1960 where the earlier setting took place as a BRAND in the market. Now the brand was regarded as a symbolic device, a risk reducer, a shorthand device directly to the manufacture-consumer relation, a legal device, and a strategic device (De Chaernatony and McDonald, 2003).#p#分页标题#e#
Factories established during the Industrial Revolution, generating mass-produced goods and needed to sell their products to a wider market, to a customer base familiar only with local goods. It quickly became apparent that a generic package of soap had difficulty competing with familiar, local products (Miller & Muir, 2004). The packaged goods manufacturers needed to convince the market that the public could place just as much trust in the non-local product from there, manufacturers quickly learned to build their brand's identity and personality such as youthfulness, fun or luxury (Jamal & Goode.2003). This began the practice we now know as "branding" today, where the consumers buy "the brand" instead of the product. This trend continued to the 1980s, and is now quantified in concepts such as brand value and brand equity. Naomi Klein has described this development as "brand equity mania". In 1988, for example, Philip Morris purchased Kraft for six times what the company was worth on paper; it was felt that what they really purchased was its brand name (Wernick, 1991).
Having an understanding of the existence of the concept, now it can be seen as a modern concept and be discussed. Following section will develop some insight to the modern components of brand on which a firm structure will be developed further.
现代概念中品牌的含义--Brand as a modern concept
As noticed in the earlier section and with the light of nature of question, I can be augmented that brand has a close relation with consumer’s perception(Solomon & Michael, 2009). Consumer perceives brand as on the bases of certain factors. Some of these factors are purely created by the marketers or the manufacturer to build up a relation with he customers and some of the factors are entirely dependent on individual’s characteristics(Solomon & Michael, 2009). These characteristics may come from variety of sources such as culture, psychology, product itself, need of the product etc. many authors have given a valid framework to explain this complex relation. The most important models that can be taken as guide to this research can be seen as following.
The mental Models
The atomic Model, and
The double vortex Brand Model
List of the proponents of the mental model is long. Aaker, Stobart, Dyson et al., Kapferer Schwenk, de Chernatony, and so on. The basic rationale of the mental models, as it is suggested from the name itself, is concerned with the psychological position of the individuals. The models argue that every individual (including the persons formulating the model) have different psychology, and with this differentiation an individual perceives a common thing (brand here) in different perspectives. The persons who are formulating the models for brand image take care of this fact and model the brand in a way that it is perceived by the consumers in a positive manner. They also assume that they have a given set of information available from the consumer’s point that helps in formulating the model.
Further more the most augmented model are based on the elements or the characteristics of the brand. The models revolve around four main ideas. Foremost the critical elements that constitute a brand, second the differentiation among the tangible and intangible elements, third the weight attributed to each element, and fourth the relation among the elements of the brand. These elements as described by De Chaernatony and McDonald, 2003 takes four levels listed as follows
Generic
Expected
Augmented, and
Potential
These levels will be of interest in up coming section as they will help us to distinguish among the brand core and understand its property in depth. They will be discussed elaborately in the heart of literature review of main body.
原子模型--The Atomic Model
As argued by the mental models that there are some tangible and intangible elements of the brand that makes an individual to perceive the brand in a different manner, the atomic model concentrates on nine such elements to develop an insight that how brad is created and how it influences the consumer’s perception. These elements are
As de Chernatony and Dall’Olmo Riley explain that“Brands start life with distinctive names, possibly endorsed by the corporate reputation or sign of ownership. The brand’s functional capabilities become recognised and, to build a relationship with consumers, the service component becomes important. Legal protection is used to deter competitive infringement, but the symbolic feature gives the brand a personality, making it more difficult to copy. As consumer confidence increases, through skillful presentation as a risk reducer, the brand becomes associated with unique added values and becomes an effective shorthand notation representing a few high quality pieces of information facilitating rapid consumer choice”.
With this insight a complete process of branding can be understood and the elements and properties of brand that make a difference in consumer’s perception can be identified. De Chernatony and Dall’Olmo Riley realising he fact that mental model and the atomic model lack in explaining the process in more elaborated manner developed a contemporary model that explains not only the process of branding but also the process and elements of consumer’s perception. Following is a brief introduction to the double Vortex Brand Model.
双涡品牌模式--The double Vortex Brand Model:
It may be noted that the mental models and the atomic model itself were static in nature. The models were developed in one point of time and do not had a time space impact in them. But as we have seen the brand and branding is a process (from both sides’ i.e form marketers and from consumers) See evolution section). The usefulness of the Vortex model lies in two important inclusions. One the inclusion of the time space (so that the model is not static in nature), and second the inclusion of the process of consumer psychology. Integrating these two components the model explains that branding on one hand is a process in which there are a number of elements are included from the marketer’s side such as vision, mission, values, and corporate culture etc. these elements are carefully considered by firm to create a brand. This brand leaves an image in the market that a consumer perceives. On the other hand there are a number of internal factors such as rationality and emotions in consumer’s mind that make a good amount of contribution to the consumer’s perception. With this model it can be concluded that consumer’s perception may lead to a significant impact on creating or destroying a brand image that in turn is the stake holder value for the firm. Thus it is relevant to analyze the consumer’s perception carefully.
研究的问题--Research Questions
From the literature above a number of questions might be asked. Most relevant for our purpose can be as follows.
History claims that branding is a process and leaves an image on consumers based on certain internal and external elements of brand. Does this fact exist in fashion market?
The literature argues (whether static or not) that consumer’s perception regarding brand is influenced by the process of branding and by factors in consumer’s mind. If it is true in fashion market, then what are such factors persisting in fashion market that lead to an influence on consumer’s perception?
Does the market share of the companies in the fashion market really reflects the consumer perceives about the brand image of that company (or brand)?
研究目标--Research aim
On the bases of the questions above the aim can be stated as follows
“Aim of this research is to analyze consumer’s perception of three contemporary high street fashion brands to explore logical explanation to the questions that are being postulated based on theoretical and practical arguments on brand and branding”
研究目的--Research Objectives
To fulfill the research aim following objectives can be framed
Understanding the process of brand of these three contemporary fashion brands and closely examining the process in light with consumer’s perception.
Enquiring the consumer base of these three high street fashion brands to explore the above relation among consumer perception and branding.
Laying down the importance and structure of consumer’s perception that may have an impact on stakeholders’ value of selected three brands (firms).#p#分页标题#e#
方法论--Methodology
This study focuses on two important concepts. First the branding and second the consumer’s perception. One of the variables in question is subjective in nature, the perception. Second variable can be evaluated with the strategies of the organizations on the one hand but at the same time there are many other subjective factors which are associated with branding (as seen in the theories). Motivational factors can vary from individual to individual. For such an analysis the literature suggests to adopt qualitative methods. Indeed at prompted stages some basic quantitative methods can be employed as the scope of the research allows.
The targeted respondents for the analysis will be a decent number of young consumers in fashion market. It is because the nature of the study is not very vast. To consider a particular section of the consumer we have to define our targeted respondents. According to the fashion oriented market, the age group will be the best demographic factor to segregate the sample. Our targeted group is expected to be age group of 18-35 years.
These sample consumers will not be random (as there is not an equal probability of selecting each and every consumer), thus it can be said that sampling techniques have to be carefully looked and the samples haves to be segregated on some bases. For this purpose we need a strong research instrument. For the analysis most concrete instrument seems to an unstructured questionnaire. The reason behind using an unstructured questionnaire is that the samples to be collected and time frame of the study restricts to adopt time and data consuming methods such as structured questionnaire. Therefore we propose a decent number of unstructured samples that can reveal the facts precisely and concretely.
On framing the questionnaire indeed the theories that have been discussed in the literature will be intensively used. On the basis of the theories the questions will be framed to understand the motives and factors behind the consumption of a consumer in a particular segment market. After that a comparison will be made on the basis of findings and will be commented and analysed. Where ever possible the questionnaire will be close ended. It is thought so because of getting the interpretation qualitatively and to use in a quantitative manner as well where it allows. Some open ended questions will be welcomed but will be taken extra precaution.
限制--Limitations:
Limitation of this paper comes from three potential sources. First source comes from the theories themselves. Second source is the time frame allotted for the study. Thirdly the data collection in such a time frame might not reveal the facts in general. On such bases following can be stated as limitations of this research.
Sampling will be not be random and each fashion consumer does not have equal probability of getting selected as a potential sample.
The number of samples will be set on allowed time frame. Lesser samples will give weak results.
A generalized statement or conclusion might not be drawn form such an analysis.
成本和时间进度--Costs and Time Schedule:
Time frame allowed for the research is approximately four moths. In this time travelling for data collection is not possible up to great extent. To be brief samples can not be collected from different places or markets. Precisely we are looking central market of Glasgow where variety of samples might be collected and a face to face interaction can be bought up for more validity of the samples. In this process the expenses will be minimum, time management will be the key to the efforts done rather. With these intentions following will be the structure of proceedings.
Initial 4 to 5 weeks will be devoted to understand the literature in depth and simultaneously a strong research instrument will be prepared. To validate the research instrument 2 weeks will be granted. Maximum time will then be devoted in collecting the samples for the analysis. 8 to 10 weeks shall give a decent number of samples. Mean while methodology, literature review and introduction chapters of the dissertation will be framed and presented for review to the guide. After having the samples analysis will be carried out and with suggestions of the guide conclusion will be framed.
|
 |
|||
| 网站地图 |
