MRKT 670 Week 1 DB Forum 1 Example

Discussion Board Forum 1: Thread and Two Replies

MRKT 670 Brand Management, Discussion Board Forum 1 (thread and two replies)

Thread by [Student Name]

The prompt, the hardware store and the classmates' posts are composites standing in for the course's own forum; the textbook, Scripture and published studies are real; the requirements follow Liberty's public course guide for MRKT 670.

Thread

Hollins Hardware has served a town of 9,000 in the Shenandoah Valley since 1961. Last year the owners joined a national purchasing cooperative to get better prices from suppliers, and the cooperative offers members a free sign, advertising and a loyalty program if they adopt its brand name. The family is torn. The cooperative's name is known across the country; the family name is known in every house in town, and the store's oldest customers still ask for "Mr. Hollins" by name although the founder's grandson now runs the counter.

Keller (2013) distinguishes a product, anything offered to satisfy a need, from a brand, which adds dimensions that differentiate a product from others designed to satisfy the same need. Those dimensions may be functional, such as reliable advice about which fastener to use, or symbolic and emotional, such as the sense that the store belongs to the town. The question for Hollins is which name carries the dimensions its customers value.

Research suggests two things a brand does for customers. Erdem and Swait (1998) argue that brand equity works as a signal: when buyers cannot judge quality in advance, a credible brand, one that consistently delivers what it promises, makes the purchase feel safer and saves them the work of finding out for themselves, and that raises what they expect to get from it. Fournier (1998) spent long interviews with three women talking about the brands in their lives and concluded that some brands become partners in people's lives, in bonds that range from casual friendships to committed partnerships, and that how good a bond is goes a long way toward explaining loyalty.

Both ideas apply to Hollins. As a signal, the cooperative's name promises national prices and wide selection, which matters to newcomers and to customers comparing prices with a big-box store twenty minutes away. The family name signals something different: that the clerk will know which paint holds up on a north-facing porch and will special-order a part for a 1970s furnace. For long-time customers, the family name is also a relationship, built over decades of conversations at the counter, and Fournier's work suggests that such bonds are not easily transferred to a new name. A customer who feels the store has been replaced by a chain may feel free to drive to the big-box store instead.

The best answer is not to choose one name but to let each do its job: "Hollins Hardware" on the sign, with the cooperative's name beneath it. The cooperative's brand would carry the price and selection signal in advertising and the loyalty program, while the family name would keep the relationship that national chains cannot copy. Keller's treatment of brand architecture describes how brands can be combined so that each contributes different associations, and many cooperative members already use paired names in this way.

Scripture speaks of Demetrius as a man who had received a good testimony from everyone, and from the truth itself (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, 3 John 12). A family store's name works much the same way. It is a testimony built by sixty years of honest dealing, and giving it up would discard what the community has said about the store, not only a word on a sign.

Classmates: when have you seen a local business lose customers after changing its name, or gain them?

Reply to Natalie

Natalie, your thread described an outdoor apparel brand whose ads show rugged climbers and argued that the brand's personality is what lets it charge more than competitors with similar jackets. I agree, and research gives that claim more precision. Aaker (1997) built a scale for brand personality with five dimensions, ruggedness among them alongside sincerity, competence, excitement and sophistication. Your brand sits clearly on ruggedness, and the scale would let the company test whether customers perceive it that way or whether its recent fashion collaborations are pulling it toward sophistication.

Keller (1993) explains why personality matters to equity. In his model, equity lives in customers' heads: what they know about a brand changes how they react to its marketing compared with an unbranded version, and that knowledge pairs awareness with an image whose associations ought to be strong, favorable and unique. A rugged personality is one such association, and its value lies in being unique to the brand in its category.

Scripture observes that even a child makes himself known by his acts, by whether his conduct is pure and upright (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Proverbs 20:11). A brand's personality works the same way: advertising can claim ruggedness, but customers learn the truth from how the jackets hold up on a mountain.

Does the brand you studied back its rugged image with product evidence, such as warranty claims or field testing by guides, or does it rely on imagery alone? If the collaborations are moving it toward sophistication, a quick survey using the five dimensions would show the shift before sales do.

Reply to Owen

Owen, your thread on the coffee shop near your office whose regulars kept coming after a chain opened across the street was a good example of loyalty that price alone cannot explain. You called it customer satisfaction, but research suggests the better word may be attachment.

Thomson et al. (2005) developed a scale to measure emotional attachment to brands and showed that it is distinct from satisfaction, involvement and brand attitudes, and that it predicts commitment and willingness to invest in the relationship. Park et al. (2010) went further, showing that brand attachment predicted consumers' intentions to perform difficult behaviors, such as paying more or waiting, as well as actual purchases and share of purchases, better than the strength of their attitudes toward the brand did. Regulars who walk past a cheaper chain are performing exactly such a difficult behavior.

For the shop, this suggests protecting the connections that create attachment, such as baristas who know customers' names, rather than competing on price. Keller (2013) describes the deepest level of brand equity as resonance, an active, loyal relationship, which fits what you observed.

Naomi's daughter-in-law Ruth told her, "Where you go I will go," and stayed when she could have returned home (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Ruth 1:16). Attachment is a smaller loyalty than Ruth's, but it has the same shape: staying when leaving would be easier.

Did the shop's owners know which customers were regulars, and did they do anything to deepen those relationships, such as a loyalty card or a regulars' table?

References

Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(3), 347-356. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379703400304

English Standard Version Bible. (2016). Crossway. (Original work published 2001)

Erdem, T., & Swait, J. (1998). Brand equity as a signaling phenomenon. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(2), 131-157. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0702_02

Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343-373. https://doi.org/10.1086/209515

Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299305700101

Keller, K. L. (2013). Strategic brand management: Building, measuring, and managing brand equity (4th ed.). Pearson.

Park, C. W., MacInnis, D. J., Priester, J., Eisingerich, A. B., & Iacobucci, D. (2010). Brand attachment and brand attitude strength: Conceptual and empirical differentiation of two critical brand equity drivers. Journal of Marketing, 74(6), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.74.6.1

Thomson, M., MacInnis, D. J., & Park, C. W. (2005). The ties that bind: Measuring the strength of consumers' emotional attachments to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15(1), 77-91. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1501_10