Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the dynamic process of brand meaning creation by multiple stakeholders during corporate rebranding in the digital environment.

By applying a symbolic interactionist perspective, the case study analyses a failed corporate rebranding of Gap. A variety of narratives by managers, consumers, designers, and marketing professionals were captured by collecting qualitative data on Facebook, Twitter, and professional forums on the internet.

The study demonstrates that the process of brand meaning creation is affected by the complexity of brand meaning negotiation within and between different stakeholder groups. The findings illustrate that the polarisation of brand meanings, in which both antagonistic and supportive forms co-exist, has a determinable impact on the outcome of corporate rebranding.

The study analyses one case of corporate rebranding failure with the focus being on the four key stakeholder groups. Future studies could examine multiple cases of successful and failed corporate rebranding, including a broader variety of internal and external stakeholders.

Marketing managers should engage multiple stakeholders proactively during the process of brand meaning creation. They are encouraged to learn from antagonistic incidents of brand meaning negotiation as well as to utilise opportunities arising during constructive episodes of brand meaning co-creation.

The study contributes to previous research by exploring how the process of brand meaning creation can trigger the collision of brand meanings, which lead to the failure of corporate rebranding.

While the corporate rebranding momentum is accelerating, corporate decisions are not currently informed by strong theory and academic research in this area. To broaden the understanding, the purpose of this paper is to generate empirical insights into the key pitfalls in the corporate rebranding process.

An exploratory qualitative study included 14 personal semi‐structured in‐depth interviews with executives involved in the corporate rebranding of a leading telecommunications firm, and a review of relevant archival materials.

The analysis highlighted common reports of four key pitfalls in corporate rebranding. These are: disconnecting with the core; stakeholder myopia; emphasis on labels, not meanings; one company, one voice: the challenge of multiple identities.

This presents a single case study but one which provides empirical insights that advance theoretical thinking in corporate rebranding, and highlights interesting avenues for further research.

This study highlights: the importance of marketing and organisational research in designing new corporate brands; the value of engaging staff in the rebranding process from a very early stage; the need to ensure that internal processes and systems encourage employees to endorse the new corporate brand values through their attitudes and behaviours.

Corporate rebranding campaigns are not only expensive exercises, but also critical for sustaining competitive advantage in light of changing corporate priorities. This is one of very few papers that provide insights on the pitfalls in the corporate rebranding process.

The paper aims to highlight the importance of corporate rebranding in branding practice, which is neglected in theoretical treatment, so an extended theory is to be developed.

From the literature, the existing state of the theory of corporate rebranding is articulated. That theory is extended by the development of six principles and by case research. The principles are illustrated in the case of a Canadian leather goods retailer which has implemented a major corporate rebranding strategy. The paper demonstrates the value of organisational single case studies as a precursor to further research.

The single case enables a more in‐depth analysis of how branding principles were applied to corporate rebranding. All six principles were supported, indicating the need for maintaining core values and cultivating the brand, linking the existing brand with the revised brand, targeting new segments, getting stakeholder “buy‐in”, achieving alignment of brand elements and the importance of promotion in awareness building.

Although corporate rebranding is often used narrowly in practice as renaming, this paper redresses the limited attempts to build theory in this area of marketing. It attempts to build a more sophisticated and substantial theory of corporate rebranding.

Companies changing their brand names are frequently reported in the business press but this phenomenon has as yet received little academic attention. This paper sets out to understand the drivers of the corporate rebranding phenomenon and to analyse the impact of such strategies on corporate brand equity.

A cross‐sectional sample of 166 rebranded companies provides descriptive data on the context in which rebranding occurs. Two case studies provide further detail on how the process of rebranding is managed.

The data show that a decision to rebrand is most often provoked by structural changes, particularly mergers and acquisitions, which have a fundamental effect on the corporation's identity and core strategy. They also suggest that a change in marketing aesthetics affects brand equity less than other factors such as employees' behaviour.

The paper proposes a conceptual model to integrate various dimensions of corporate rebranding. Analysing the rebranding phenomenon by assessing the leverage of brand equity from one level of the brand hierarchy to the other constitutes an interesting route for further research.

Managers are reminded that corporate rebranding needs to be managed holistically and supported by all stakeholders, with particular attention given to employees' reactions.

This paper is of value to anybody seeking to understand the rebranding phenomenon, including academics and business managers.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the moderating roles of brand name attitude and product expertise on the impact of different corporate rebranding strategies on consumer brand preference. Rebranding strategies include evolutionary and revolutionary rebranding strategies, while brand name attitude is consumer attitude towards a firm's original brand name and consumer product expertise refers to the consumer knowledge related to the brand's product or service.

A 2×2 factorial experimental design is used to examine the proposed hypotheses. In total, 220 undergraduates from a public university in Taipei of Taiwan participate in the experiment.

The findings indicate that given brand repositioning is preferable, the use of evolutionary rebranding strategies is superior in enhancing consumer brand preference in the case of pleasant original brand name attitude, while the use of revolutionary strategies is superior when consumers hold less pleasant attitude. In addition, expert consumers show similar responses towards the two rebranding strategies, whereas evolutionary strategies seem to be more effective than revolutionary ones in enhancing consumer brand preferences in the case of novice consumers.

A convenient sampling method was employed and undergraduate students were the research subjects. Besides, a fictitious brand was used in the experiment design. As a result, the generalisability and applicability of the current research findings should be considered and carried out with cautions.

The findings of the research provide empirical understanding on the use of rebranding strategies to generate higher levels of brand preference under contingencies, thus helping brand managers apply a more appropriate type of rebranding strategies when necessary.

The current study is the preliminary causal-oriented work to provide guidance with appropriate rebranding strategies under the contingencies of consumers’ original brand name attitude and product expertise.

The purpose of this paper is to describe company renaming as a process among small firms, including the events and actors in and the reasons for company renaming.

The study presents an interpretative narrative process research approach. The empirical part is conducted as an instrumental multiple case study of six cases.

Company renaming is a long-lasting, complex, iterative and management-centric process among small firms. The process consists of six main events that are conducted more or less simultaneously but which need to be further divided into sub-events in order to reveal their order. The reasons for renaming are that the current company name is difficult to use or it is less known than the name of the company's well-known product among stakeholders.

The existing research on branding from the viewpoint of organisational change has been scarce. The study suggests that also other reasons than change in the organisation or in its environment may cause corporate rebranding. The empirical data from a specific contest, the B2B software industry, may limit the statistical generalizability of the results.

For small business managers, the study suggests actively involving stakeholders to the process. The new name can be developed cheaply, but the process can be long. For ensuring a shorter process, costs need to be accepted.

The use of interpretative narrative process research approach and an instrumental multiple case study provide methodological contributions to the field of corporate rebranding.

The paper aims to analyse the effect of abandoning a venerable brand name (Guinness) and all of the reputation value that it embodied in favour of a new, untested name (Diageo). The paper seeks to examine the extent to which this affects consumers' perceptions of the product and the corporation.

Six hypotheses were tested in the study by surveying corporate and product brand images among a group of consumers (n=411) using the Davies et al. Corporate Character Scale.

The survey establishes that a change of corporate name does affect the perceptions of the corporation but not the products. It also confirms that image spillovers occur between the corporate and the product levels. Corporate image is derived from product image, and vice versa, when the two share the same name.

Although the case study approach allows the gaining of a deep insight into a phenomenon, it is at the expense of generalisability.

The study implies that consumers fail to distinguish between product and corporate brand when the two share the same name. Managers may neutralise corporate images by attributing a different brand name to the corporation.

The paper seeks to fill the conceptual vacuum in which decisions to adopt a new corporate name and rearrange the brand architecture seem to be made.

Reviews the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoints practical implications from cutting‐edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

In an increasingly competitive business world, companies that stand still invite failure with open arms. Survival and success depend on the aptitude to evolve gradually to meet new challenges that arise. Some organizations elect to go much further and see corporate rebranding (CR) as the best way to remain competitive. As many have discovered, this is not a decision to be taken lightly. Rebranding at product level is difficult enough. Consumers have pre‐existing attitudes towards a product brand and these attitudes must be considered within any rebranding program. Repositioning invariably contradicts some of these associations, and when this occurs consumers feel estranged from the brand. And since CR impacts upon multiple stakeholders, the likelihood is that there will be a significantly greater number of difficulties to overcome.

Provides strategic insights and practical thinking that have influenced some of the world's leading organizations.

The briefing saves busy executives and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy‐to‐digest format.

The purpose of this paper is to develop the lifecycle and teleology process theory illustrations by uniting processes and their outcomes based on their being bounded in time.

The study combines objective and subjective ontological approaches to organisational development and change processes. The narrative data of corporate rebranding among small B2B companies were gathered through a multiple case study and analysed in relation to flow of time. The illustrations of teleology and lifecycle process theory are modified based on empirical data.

The underlying logic of the lifecycle and teleology illustrations is found to be the same. The historical processes follow the logic of the lifecycle processes and emphasise the outcomes; the lifecycle process theory illustration is modified by adding outcomes. The current processes are in line with the literal description of the teleology. Teleology processes are illustrated using double-headed arrows between all processes.

Employing the objective and subjective ontological view in the same study might be questioned. The modifications to the process theory illustrations are only one view on the issue and the study does not take a stand on how the imagined future processes might be described.

The study helps researchers and managers better understand the lifecycle and teleology process theory and the role of outcomes in process research. The study should encourage researchers and managers to incorporate the role of process outcomes into their future (business) planning more efficiently, and combine different ontological views.

The study is a rare attempt to develop process theory illustrations.