Free Essay

Branding

In:

Submitted By mhmd
Words 33130
Pages 133
‫داﻧﺸﻜﺪه ﻋﻠﻮم اﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻲ‬
‫ﮔﺮوه ﻣﺪﻳﺮﻳﺖ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻲ‬
‫‪MBA‬‬

‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬

‫اﺳﺘﺎد:‬
‫ﺟﻨﺎب آﻗﺎي دﻛﺘﺮ ﻓﻀﻠﻲ‬

‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ و ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻒ:‬
‫ﻣﺤﻤ‪‬ﺪ اﺳﺪي‬
‫ﺤﻤ‬

‫آذر و دي 9831‬

‫ﻓﻬﺮﺳﺖ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ‬

‫ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ‬

‫1‬

‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ اول - ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬

‫2‬

‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ دوم - ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬

‫81‬

‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻔﻲ - ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬

‫23‬

‫ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺖ 1 – اﺻﻞ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ اول‬

‫84‬

‫ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺖ 2 – اﺻﻞ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ دوم‬

‫65‬

‫ ‬
‫ ‪i‬‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ‬

‫در ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ، ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺑﺪون ﻧﺎم ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﺪﻧﺪ. ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺗﻨﻬﺎ واﺳﻄﻪﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﺑﻮدﻧﺪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﻮاد اوﻟﻴﻪ‬
‫و ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪة ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻲ و ﺑﻪ دﻟﻴﻞ ﻣﺤﺪود ﺑﻮدن ﺟﻮاﻣﻊ و دﺳﺘﺮﺳﻲ آنﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزارﻫﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ، اﺻﻮﻻً رﻗﺎﺑﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ و‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞ اﻣﺮوز وﺟﻮد ﻧﺪاﺷﺖ. ﺑﺎ ﮔﺬﺷﺖ زﻣﺎن و ﭘﻴﺸﺮﻓﺖ ﺟﻮاﻣﻊ، ﻗﺮن ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﻪ دورة ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮات ﺳﺮﻳﻊ ﺑﺪل ﮔﺸﺘﻪ و‬
‫ﻻزﻣﺔ ﻣﺼﻮن ﻣﺎﻧﺪن از ﺗﺒﻌﺎت اﻳﻦ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮات ﺳﺮﻳﻊ، ﺑﻪ روز ﻧﮕﻪ داﺷﺘﻦ ﻣﺰﻳﺘﻬﺎي رﻗﺎﺑﺘﻲ اﺳﺖ. ﻳﻜﻲ از ﻣﻮاردي ﻛﻪ در‬
‫ادﺑﻴﺎت ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﻣﺪﻳﺮﻳﺖ، از آن ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﺰﻳﺖ رﻗﺎﺑﺘﻲ ﻳﺎد ﻣﻲﺷﻮد، »ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻌﺎرﻳﻒ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻲ اراﺋﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺪه ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺔ آﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻮاردي از ﻗﺒﻴﻞ ﻧﺎم ﺗﺠﺎري، ﻟﻮﮔﻮ، ﺷﻌﺎر ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ و ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻲ از اﻳﻦ دﺳﺖ را در ﺑﺮ ﻣﻲﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ. اﻣﺎ‬
‫واﻗﻌﻴﺖ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻲ ﻓﺮاﺗﺮ از ﻫﻤﺔ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮارد اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺣﺴﻲ از ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻳﺎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻳﻚ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ‬
‫اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ در ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﺣﻚ ﺷﺪه و ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺰان ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﻴﺖ اﻳﻦ ﺣﺲ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ارزش ﭘﻴﺪا ﻛﺮده و ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺷﺖ زﻣﺎن ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﻲ از داراﻳﻲﻫﺎي ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن ﻣﻲﮔﺮدد.‬
‫در اﻳﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ، دو ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﺎوﻳﻦ »ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« و »ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت« ﺑﺎ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع ﻣﺤﻮري »ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« اﻧﺘﺨﺎب و ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﺷﺪهاﻧﺪ. در ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻻت‬
‫ﺳﻌﻲ ﺷﺪه ﺗﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﻬﺮهﮔﻴﺮي از ﺷﻴﻮة ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ آزاد، ﻣﺘﻨﻲ ﺳﻠﻴﺲ و روان اراﺋﻪ ﮔﺮدد ﺗﺎ ﺗﺌﻮرﻳﻚ ﺑﻮدن‬
‫ﻣﺤﺘﻮاي ﻣﻘﺎﻻت، درك آن را ﺑﺮاي ﺧﻮاﻧﻨﺪه دﺷﻮار ﻧﺴﺎزد. ﭘﺲ از ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ و ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻻت، ﺳﻌﻲ ﺷﺪه ﺗﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎز‬
‫ﻛﺮدن ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع ﻣﺤﻮري ﻣﻘﺎﻻت، ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺿﻤﻦ اراﺋﻪ و ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎي اﻳﺮاﻧﻲ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋيﻫﺎي ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ، در ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪاي ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮان »ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ« ﺗﺎ‬
‫ﺣﺪودي ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ دو ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﮕﻲ ﺑﺮﻗﺮار و رواﺑﻂ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪﻫﺎ و ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﮔﺮدد. ﻣﺘﻦ اﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻲ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺖ اراﺋﻪ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ.‬
‫ﺑﻲﺷﻚ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﻲﻧﻘﺺ ﻧﺒﻮده و ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ادﻋﺎﻳﻲ از ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﻧﮕﺎرﻧﺪه، ادﻋﺎﻳﻲ ﮔﺰاف ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد. ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ روي،‬
‫ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻧﻈﺮات و اﻧﺘﻘﺎدات از ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ‪ asadi@myindustry.ir‬ﻣﻮﺟﺒﺎت ﻛﺴﺐ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ و ﺑﻪﻛﺎرﮔﻴﺮي آﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫در ﻛﺎرﻫﺎي ﺑﻌﺪي را ﺑﺮاي ﻧﮕﺎرﻧﺪه ﻓﺮاﻫﻢ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﻛﺮد.‬
‫١ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ‬

‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ اول:‬

‫ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫‪ Derived versus full name extensions‬‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬

‫ﭼﻜﻴﺪه‬
‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ روي ﻣﺒﺤﺚ »ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ دارﻧﺪ اﻳﻦ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻓﺮض را دارﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ‬
‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ، ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎن ﺷﻜﻞ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﺎﻗﻲ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﻣﺎﻧﺪ )ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺧﻤﻴﺮدﻧﺪان ‪ Oral‐B‬و ﻧﺦ دﻧﺪان ‪.(Oral‐B‬‬
‫در ﺻﻮرﺗﻴﻜﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ در اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺧﻮد از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‬
‫)ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﭼﺎي ﺳﺮد ‪ .(Nestea‬در اﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎن ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ ﻫﺮﻳﻚ از اﻳﻦ دو اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه و‬
‫اﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف ﺑﺮ روي ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺻﺤﺖ اﻳﻦ اﻳﺪه را ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻣﻲ-‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﺖ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎه ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺷﺪه و روﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫را ﺗﺴﻬﻴﻞ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻛﻠﻴﺪي: ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ، ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻧﺎم ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬

‫ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺰء ﻣﻬﻤﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺤﺴﻮب ﺷﺪه و اﺣﺘﻤﺎﻻً ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﺑﺴﺰاﻳﻲ ﺑﺮ ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮد ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ داﺷﺖ اﻣﺎ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺗﻲ‬
‫ﻛﻪ در ﺣﻮزه ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺻﻮرت ﭘﺬﻳﺮﻓﺘﻪ اﻧﺪ ﻛﻤﺘﺮ ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻪ اﻧﺪ. وﻗﺘﻲ ﻛﻮدﻛﻲ ﺑﻪ دﻧﻴﺎ ﻣﻲ آﻳﺪ، اﻧﺘﺨﺎب‬
‫ﻧﺎم ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﺮاي وي ﻳﻜﻲ از ﻣﻬﻤﺘﺮﻳﻦ و ﺣﺘﻲ ﺳﺨﺖ ﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻤﺎﺗﻲ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ واﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﻛﻮدك )ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان‬
‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪآورﻧﺪﮔﺎن وي( ﺑﺎﻳﺪ اﺗﺨﺎذ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪ. در دﻧﻴﺎي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت و ﺧﺪﻣﺎت ﻧﻴﺰ، وﻇﻴﻔﺔ ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﻴﺰان‬
‫ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﺎن را ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﻣﻲ ﻛﺸﺪ. ﻣﺘﺨﺼﺼﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ اﻳﻦ واﻗﻌﻴﺖ را ﺑﻪ رﺳﻤﻴﺖ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻨﺪ: ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﻜﻲ از‬
‫ﻓﺎﻛﺘﻮرﻫﺎي ﻛﻠﻴﺪي ارزش آﻓﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ روي ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ آوردن ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ‬
‫ﮔﺬاﺷﺘﻪ و ﺣﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻌﻨﻲ ﺑﻮده و ﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﺮ وﺟﻬﻪ و ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮﮔﺬار ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. اﮔﺮﭼﻪ، ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و‬
‫ﺗﻨﻮع آن در ادﺑﻴﺎت ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺧﻴﻠﻲ ﺗﺎزﮔﻲ ﻧﺪارد. ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎت ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ اﻳﻦ ﺗﺎرﻳﺦ ﻓﺮض را ﺑﺮ اﻳﻦ‬

‫٣ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﮔﺬاﺷﺘﻪ اﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي از ﻧﺎم ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ1 اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﺜﺎل، ﺧﻤﻴﺮ دﻧﺪان ‪ ،Oral B‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻧﺦ دﻧﺪان ‪ Oral B‬و دﻫﺎن ﺷﻮي ‪ Oral B‬ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻣﻲ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ. وﺟﻮد ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻓﺮﺿﻲ ﺑﻲ دﻟﻴﻞ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ، ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ ﻳﻜﻲ از‬
‫دﻻﻳﻞ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺑﻬﺮهﺑﺮداري از ارزش ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺷﺪه ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ )‪ (brand equity‬در ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﺗﺴﻬﻴﻞ‬
‫ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ درﻳﺎﻓﺖ اﻗﺒﺎل ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﻧﺎم ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ، رﺳﻴﺪن ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ اﻫﺪاف را آﺳﺎن ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﺣﺎل، ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎي دﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دﻳﮕﺮي را ﻛﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺷﺪه اﻳﺠﺎد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﺜﺎل،‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ‪ Ultra‬ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ‪ BMW‬و ﻳﺎ ‪ Courtyard‬ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ‪ .Marriot‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﺣﺮوف ﻳﺎ ﺳﻴﻼﺑﻬﺎي‬
‫اﺑﺘﺪاﻳﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ را ﺑﺮداﺷﺘﻪ و آﻧﻬﺎ را ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎ و ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻇﺎﻫﺮي ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻛﺮده و ﻳﻚ ﻧﺎم‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺷﺪه2 اﻳﺠﺎد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﺜﺎل، ﭼﺎي ﺳﺮد ‪ Nestea‬و ﻳﺎ ﻓﻴﻠﻤﻬﺎي ‪ .Kodacolor‬درواﻗﻊ، ﻳﻜﻲ از‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺗﺠﺎري دﻧﻴﺎ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺷﺪة ‪ Nescafe‬ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﺷﻤﺎ ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ ﻣﻲ دﻫﻴﺪ ﭼﺎي ‪ Nestle Tea‬ﺑﺨﺮﻳﺪ ﻳﺎ ‪Nestea‬؟ ﻓﻴﻠﻤﻬﺎي رﻧﮕﻲ ‪ Kodak‬ﺑﺨﺮﻳﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻓﻴﻠﻤﻬﺎي‬
‫‪Kodacolor‬؟ آﻳﺎ اﺗﺨﺎذ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ در ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي اﻳﺠﺎد ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺷﺪه و‬
‫ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ روي ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺛﺮات ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻬﻲ دارد؟ آﻳﺎ ﻋﺪم ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ‪ Nestea‬و‬
‫‪ Nestle Tea‬ﺑﺮاي ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻧﺴﺘﻠﻪ ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪﻫﺎي ﻳﻜﺴﺎن دارد؟ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ، ﻣﺰﻳﺘﻬﺎي اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺷﺪه‬
‫را در ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ، ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻲ ﻛﻪ در ادﺑﻴﺎت ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ رواج ﭼﻨﺪاﻧﻲ‬
‫ﻧﺪاﺷﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ.‬
‫ﭼﺮا ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎي اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ، از ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﺟﺰﻳﻲ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ؟ در ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺳﻮال، ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻬﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻲ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ داده ﺷﻮد. ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺳﺎده و ﻛﺎرﺑﺮدي اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺷﻤﺎ ﻧﻤﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻴﺪ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي‬
‫ﺑﻴﺶ از ﺣﺪ ﻃﻮﻻﻧﻲ داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﺪ. ﭘﺎﺳﺦ دوم ﻛﻤﻲ رواﻧﺸﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪﺗﺮ و اﺛﺮﺑﺨﺶﺗﺮ اﺳﺖ: ﻧﺎم ﺑﺨﺸﻲ، ﻣﺨﻔﻒ و ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﻣﺴﺘﻌﺎر ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ‪ CAT‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎي ‪ ،Caterpillar‬اﺛﺮات ﻣﺘﻔﺎوﺗﻲ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎم اﺻﻠﻲ روي ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺐ‬
‫ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ داﺷﺖ. در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ، ﻟﺴﺘﺪﻻل دوم ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﺷﺪه و ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس اﻳﻦ ادﺑﻴﺎت، ﻓﺮض اﺻﻠﻲ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي‬
‫ﺗﺠﺎري ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ ﺳﻮدﻣﻨﺪﺗﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ. آﻳﺎ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎﻧﻲ ﻏﻴﺮ از ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ،‬
‫ﺑﺮ روي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺬارد؟ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ روﺷﻲ اﺳﺖ ﺑﺮاي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت در ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﻓﻌﻠﻲ )ﺑﺎزار‬
‫ﻫﺪف( ﻣﺤﺼﻮل. ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﺣﺎل، اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺑﺮاي ﺟﺬب ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﺟﺪﻳﺪي ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ را ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻧﻜﺮده‬
‫اﻧﺪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎر ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد، اﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ راﺳﺘﻲ ﭼﻪ ﻛﺴﻲ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را اﻣﺘﺤﺎن ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﻛﺮد.‬
‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫ ‪ Parent brand name‬‬
‫ ‪ Derived brand name‬‬

‫٢‬

‫٤ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻣﺮور ادﺑﻴﺎت: ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي »ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه«‬
‫ﺑﺎ وﺟﻮد ﻣﻘﺎﻻت ﻓﺮاوان در راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎم اﺻﻠﻲ ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﻛﺮده اﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻻت داﻧﺸﮕﺎﻫﻲ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻛﻤﻲ ﺑﻪ دﻳﮕﺮ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻫﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ‪ sub‐branding‬و ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺸﺘﻖ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮده اﻧﺪ. ‪Sub‐brand‬ﻫﺎ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻧﺎم اﺻﻠﻲ را ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ‪ Ultra‬ﺑﺮاي‬
‫‪ BMW‬و ‪ Countryard‬ﺑﺮاي ‪.Marriot‬‬
‫در اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ‪ ،sub‐branding‬وﻗﺘﻲ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ، ﻧﺎم اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻧﺦ در ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. درﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ در ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻛﺎﻣﻼً ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت‬
‫اﺳﺖ. ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻫﺎ ﺑﺮاي ﻧﮕﻬﺪاري اﻳﻦ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ، زﻳﺮ دﺳﺘﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﻲ را ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ اﻳﺠﺎد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ.‬
‫آﻧﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ ﺳﻨﺢ ﺑﻨﺪي ﻓﺮﻋﻲ1 را دﻧﺒﺎل ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ اﺟﺎزه ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﺗﺎ دﺳﺘﻪ ﺑﻨﺪي و ﺗﻢ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﻗﻲ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﺪ‬
‫اﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺿﻤﻴﻤﻪ: زﻳﺮ دﺳﺘﻪ اي ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻓﺮﻋﻲ )‪.(sub brand‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﻣﺸﺘﻖ، ﺑﺎ دﻳﮕﺮ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻫﺎي ﻣﻌﻤﻮل ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺨﺸﻲ‬
‫از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ در آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎر ﺑﺮده ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﺳﻪ ﻧﻮع ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ از ﻧﻮع ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ وﺟﻮد دارد: اول( اﺳﺘﻔﺎده‬
‫از ﺑﺨﺸﻲ از ﻧﺎم اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه ﻳﻚ ﺷﻨﺎس ﺑﺮاي دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ‪ ،(Nestea‬دوم( اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺨﺸﻲ‬
‫از ﻧﺎم اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮم ﻛﻠﻲ )ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ‪ (Nesquick‬و ﺳﻮم( ﻧﺎم ﻣﺴﺘﻌﺎر ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ )ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ‪ CAT‬ﺑﺮاي‬
‫‪ Caterpillar‬و ﺧﺪﻣﺎت ﻫﻮاﻳﻲ ﻣﻮﺷﻜﻲ ‪ TED‬ﺑﺮاي ‪ .(UNITED‬ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﺮ روي اﻧﻮاع اول و دوم ﻣﻲ-‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫وﻗﺘﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺨﺸﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ را اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ، ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺎز ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮدازش و‬
‫وﻓﻖ دادن اﻳﻦ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ در ﺣﺎﻓﻈﺔ دﺳﺘﻪ ﺑﻨﺪي ﻣﺤﻮر ﺧﻮد ﺑﻪ روﺷﻲ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪه ﺗﺮ ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ داﺷﺖ. اﺑﺘﺪا،‬
‫ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻗﺎدر ﺑﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻮده و ﺑﻴﻦ آن و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ارﺗﺒﺎط ﺑﺮﻗﺮار ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ روﻳﻪ،‬
‫ﻧﺎﺳﺎزﮔﺎري ﺑﻴﻦ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت ﻣﻮﺟﻮد در ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه )در راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ( و اﻃﻼﻋﺎت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ(‬
‫را ﺣﻞ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ. اﻛﻨﻮن زﻳﺮدﺳﺘﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺨﺸﻲ از ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎر ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ در ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ،‬
‫اﻛﻨﻮن ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻲ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد.‬

‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫ ‪ Subtypification‬‬

‫٥ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻟﺬا ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ و ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻫﺎ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺷﺪه از آن، ﻳﻚ ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪة ﺳﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺮﺣﻠﻪاي اﺳﺖ: اول( ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه، ﺳﺮﻧﺦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﻣﻲ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺪ )ﺑﺨﺸﻲ از ﻧﺎم ﺟﺪﻳﺪ(، دوم( ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه‬
‫ﻧﺎﺳﺎزﮔﺎري ﻣﻮﺟﻮد ﺑﻴﻦ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت ﻗﺒﻠﻲ و ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﻣﺜﻼً دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل( را ﺑﺎ ﺳﻨﺦ ﺑﻨﺪي ﻓﺮﻋﻲ ﺧﻮد رﻓﻊ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ،‬
‫ﺳﻮم( اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ و ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻫﺎ واﻗﻊ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد.‬
‫ﺑﻪ دﻟﻴﻞ وﻳﮋﮔﻴﻬﺎي ﺧﺎص ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ، ﻫﺮﻛﺲ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﺗﺪاﻋﻲ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺧﻮد، ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ اﻧﺘﻘﺎل‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوﺗﻲ داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎﻧﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺮﻧﺦ آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎي ﻧﺎم ﻛﺎﻣﻞ »‪ ،«Nestle‬ﻓﻘﻂ ﻋﺒﺎرت »‪«Nes‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﺎﻣﻞ درﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻧﻤﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. اﺻﻠﻲ ﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﺤﺚ در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺸﻜﻞ اﺳﺖ. ‪ Nes‬ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ دﻳﮕﺮي را ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺘﺒﺎدر ﺳﺎزد اﻣﺎ ﻟﺰوﻣﺎً ارﺗﺒﺎﻃﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ‪Nestle‬‬
‫ﻧﺪاﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﻪ دﻟﻴﻞ روﺷﻬﺎي ﺧﺎﺻﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﺮاي ﭘﺮدازش ‪sub‐brand‬ﻫﺎ و اﻃﻼﻋﺎت آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎر ﻣﻲ‬
‫ﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ، ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد ﻛﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ‪ sub‐branding‬روش ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﺗﺮي ﺑﺮاي ﻛﺎﻫﺶ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮر ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫اراﺋﻪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه در ﺻﻮرﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ از ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ ﺳﻨﺦ ﺑﻨﺪي ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻬﻲ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﻨﻨﺪ، ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻬﻲ‬
‫ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ داﺷﺖ.‬

‫ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺎت ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ‬
‫ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎت ﻗﺒﻠﻲ ﺑﺮ روي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻋﻮاﻣﻞ زﻳﺮ ﻣﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ: ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل، ﻗﺪرت ﻛﻴﻔﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ، ﺳﻄﺢ دﺷﻮاري ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﺑﺮاي ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪه، ﭘﺮﺗﻔﻮي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺰان ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻗﺒﻠﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻬﻤﺘﺮﻳﻦ آﻧﻬﺎ ﻫﻤﺎن ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼوه، اﺛﺮات‬
‫ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي ﻳﺎ اﺛﺮاﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺬارد، ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ﻛﻠﻴﺪي دﻳﮕﺮي ﺑﺮاي ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺷﻜﺴﺖ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ از آن ﺟﻬﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي‬
‫اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ داراي اﻫﻤﻴﺖ اﺳﺖ. ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل و اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮر درك ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﺸﻜﻼت ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬

‫٦ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺮاي ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل1، ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ درك ﺷﺪه ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﺑﻴﻦ دو ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. آﻛﺮ و ﻛﻠﺮ )0991( ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ را در ﺳﻪ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ: ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت، درﺟﺔ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺰﻳﻨﻲ ﺑﻴﻦ‬
‫دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت، ﻣﻴﺰان ﻣﻜﻤﻞ ﺑﻮدن دﺳﺘﻪ ﻫﺎ )دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اﺻﻠﻲ و دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ(. ﺑﺎ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ »ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ«‬
‫ﻳﻜﻲ از اﺑﻌﺎد ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ وﻟﻲ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن آﻧﻬﺎ را ﻫﻢ ﻣﻌﻨﻲ در ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪاﻧﺪ. ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل،‬
‫ﺑﺎزﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ آن را ﺗﺴﻬﻴﻞ ﻧﻤﻮده و ﺑﺮ روي ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻛﻪ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﻓﻌﺎل ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ اﺛﺮﮔﺬار‬
‫ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد. ﻫﺮﭼﻪ ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه، ﺗﻠﻘﻲ‬
‫ﺧﻮد از ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻗﺒﻠﻲ را راﺣﺖﺗﺮ ﻣﻨﺘﻘﻞ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ ارﺗﺒﺎط ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت وﻳﮋه و ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺘﻬﺎي‬
‫ارﺗﺒﺎﻃﻲ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﺖ ﮔﺮدد.‬
‫ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﻗﺒﻠﻲ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ را ﺑﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﻛﺮدهاﻧﺪ. از آﻧﺠﺎﻳﻴﻜﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺨﺸﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ را دارا ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ، ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮان اﻳﻦ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ را ﺑﺮاي آﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻌﻤﻴﻢ داد. اﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ اﻧﺘﻘﺎل در‬
‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺧﻴﻠﻲ ﻗﻮي ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ، ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻛﻠﻴﺪي ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﻗﺒﻠﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎن دﻫﻨﺪة اﺛﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﻮرد ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻗﺮار ﮔﻴﺮد. ﺑﻌﻼوه، از دﻳﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﻛﻠﻲ، ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه‬
‫ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ در ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺗﻔﺎوﺗﻲ داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﻓﺮض 1‪ :a‬ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ درك ﺷﺪه ﺑﻴﻦ دﺳﺘﻪﻫﺎي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ، ﺑﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ دارد. ﻓﺮض 1‪ :b‬ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ درك ﺷﺪه ﺑﻴﻦ دﺳﺘﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ، ﺑﺮ‬
‫ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ دارد. ﻓﺮض 1‪ :c‬ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ درك ﺷﺪه ﺑﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از دﺳﺘﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ،‬
‫در ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ‬
‫ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻋﺪم ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﮔﺬاﺷﺖ. ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﻧﺸﺎن‬
‫داده اﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺘﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﮔﺬاﺷﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ. در ﺻﻮرﺗﻴﻜﻪ ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺳﺎﺑﻖ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺷﻮد، اﻳﻦ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﺣﺘﻲ ﻗﻮي ﺗﺮ ﻫﻢ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد.‬

‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫‪ Product fit‬‬

‫٧ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻳﻚ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻮﻓﻖ از ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﺖ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ، ﺑﻬﺒﻮد ﻗﺼﺪ ﺧﺮﻳﺪ ﻣﺸﺘﺮي و اﻓﺰاﻳﺶ ﺳﻬﻢ‬
‫ﺑﺎزار، ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺬارد. ﺗﺠﺎرب ﻣﻄﻠﻮب ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻋﻘﺎﻳﺪ ﻗﻮي در ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺼﺮف‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪه اﻳﺠﺎد ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻋﻘﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮف ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺎز ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ ﮔﺸﺖ. اﻳﻦ اﺗﻔﺎق در ﻣﻮرد ﻋﺪم ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻫﻢ ﺻﺎدق اﺳﺖ. اﻳﻦ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ دو دﻟﻴﻞ واﻗﻊ ﺷﻮد: اول( ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ، دوم( ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس اﻃﻼﻋﺎت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎج ﻧﻤﻮده و اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎج ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ ﻛﺎﻫﺶ‬
‫ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ درﻳﺎﻓﺘﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ، اﻋﺘﻤﺎد ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ دو ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﻛﺎﻫﺶ ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ.‬
‫آﻳﺎ اﻳﻦ اﺛﺮات ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ ﻳﻜﺴﺎن ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ؟ آﻳﺎ اﻳﻦ اﺛﺮات ﺑﺮاي ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ و ﺷﻜﺴﺖ‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻴﺰان ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ؟ ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻣﻴﻠﺒﺮگ، ﭘﺎرك و ﻣﻚ ﻛﺎرﺗﻲ )7991( ﻳﻚ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫‪ ،sub‐branding‬ﺳﺮﻧﺦ ﻫﺎﻳﻲ را ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻓﺮاﻫﻢ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ وي ﺑﺘﻮاﻧﺪ زﻳﺮ دﺳﺘﻪاي را ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎم‬
‫ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎت ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻲ ‪ sub‐brand‬اﻳﺠﺎد ﻛﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﭘﺮوﺳﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪودي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ را از ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺼﻮن ﻣﻲدارد. ﻟﺬا اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي ﺿﻌﻴﻒﺗﺮ ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ ﺑﻮد. ﻓﺮض ﺑﺮ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻲ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﭘﺮوﺳﻪ اي را ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎر ﻣﻲ اﻧﺪازﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻓﺮض ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﻮده‬
‫و ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت از آن ﻧﻤﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. در اﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه زﻳﺮدﺳﺘﻪ اي را ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﻳﺠﺎد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﺪون‬
‫آﻧﻜﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻓﺮض وي از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﻄﺮح ﺑﺎﺷﺪ و اﻳﻦ اﺗﻔﺎق اﺛﺮ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي را ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪ زﻳﺎدي ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. اﻟﺒﺘﻪ‬
‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻮردي ﻳﻚ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺧﺎص ﻣﺤﺴﻮب ﺷﺪه و از اﺛﺮات ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ و اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ آن رﻓﺖ ﺑﻬﺮه ﻣﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻧﺨﻮاﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ.‬
‫در ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎل، ﺗﻮﻗﻊ ﺑﺮ آن اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي ﺿﻌﻴﻒﺗﺮي ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺳﻨﺘﻲ‬
‫اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ در ﭘﻲ ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ داﺷﺖ. ﺑﺮ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺎس ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺎت زﻳﺮ ﻣﻄﺮح ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﻓﺮض 2‪ :a‬ﻧﺎﻛﺎﻣﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ در ﺑﺎزار، در ﺻﻮرت اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه در ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﺎﻣﻞ، ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﻛﻤﺘﺮي ﺑﺮ وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﮔﺬاﺷﺖ. ﻓﺮض 2‪ :b‬در ﺻﻮرت اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه در ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﺎﻣﻞ، ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﻛﻤﺘﺮي ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﮔﺬاﺷﺖ.‬

‫٨ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف‬
‫ﺑﺎ وﺟﻮد اﻫﻤﻴﺖ اﺛﺮ ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف، ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن ﻣﺒﺤﺚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻻً ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﭼﻨﺪاﻧﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺨﺸﻬﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻣﺼﺮف‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن در ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﺧﻮد ﻧﻤﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. دﻟﻴﻞ اﻳﻦ اﺗﻔﺎق اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن ﻋﺎدت دارﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﺿﻤﻨﻲ ﻓﺮض‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻣﻌﻤﻮل ﺑﻪ ﺑﺨﺸﻬﺎي ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻲ از ﺑﺎزار ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎت ﻗﺒﻠﻲ اﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ را ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﻫﺪف از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﻏﻴﺮ ﻫﺪف‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت اﺳﺖ. ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎرﻫﺎي داﻧﺸﻲ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻫﺮﻳﻚ از ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ واﻛﻨﺶ آﻧﻬﺎ در ﻗﺒﺎل ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮﮔﺬار اﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت اﺳﺖ )ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎً در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺮﻳﺪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ(. اﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺰارة اﺳﺎﺳﻲ اﺳﺖ و‬
‫ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﺮا ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪي را ﻛﻪ آﻧﻬﺎ را ﻫﺪف ﻗﺮار داده ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺗﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﻲ-‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. اﻧﻮاع ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻲ از داﻧﺶ وﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻧﺤﻮة درﻳﺎﻓﺖ ارﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎت ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺳﻮي ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮﮔﺬار اﺳﺖ و ﻳﻚ‬
‫ارﺗﺒﺎط درﺳﺖ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﺪ راﺑﻄﺔ ﻧﺰدﻳﻚﺗﺮي ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﻗﺮار ﺳﺎزد.‬
‫اﻳﻦ راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻫﺪف، زﻣﺎﻧﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻄﻮح رﺿﺎﻳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻬﺮهﮔﻴﺮي از ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت و دﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﺤﺮﻛﺎت‬
‫ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ اﻓﺰاﻳﺶ ﻣﻲ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ، ﺗﻘﻮﻳﺖ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد. ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﮔﺎن اﻳﻦ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ را ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻼﺷﻬﺎي ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮕﻲ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﺎن ﺑﺮاي دﺳﺘﻴﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف ﺻﻮرت ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ ﺷﺮح ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ. از ﻳﻚ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺗﺌﻮرﻳﻚ دﻳﮕﺮ اﻳﻦ اﻳﺪه را‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮر ﻛﻨﻴﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ، ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ از ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻳﻚ اﺛﺮ از ﻧﻮع »ﻋﺸﻘﻲ« ﺑﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮﮔﺬار ﺷﻮد. آﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺮﺟﺒﺤﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه در ﻗﺒﺎل ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد اﻳﻦ اﻳﺪه را ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن‬
‫ﻫﺪف، ﺑﻪ اﻳﺠﺎد ﻳﻚ اﺣﺴﺎس اوﻟﻴﻪ، ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ اﺣﺴﺎس آﻳﻨﺪه در ﻗﺒﺎل ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻛﻤﻚ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ و اﻳﻦ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﺑﺪون‬
‫ارﺗﺒﺎط ﺑﺎ دﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻪ ﻫﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺔ اﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻋﻼﻗﻪ اي در ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻫﺪف ﻗﻮيﺗﺮ اﺳﺖ و ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺗﺮي از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﻧﺠﺎم ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ.‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﺑﺤﺜﻬﺎ ﺧﻮب ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ اﻣﺎ ﺳﻮال اﻳﻨﺠﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ واﻛﻨﺶ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻫﺪف در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ ﭼﻪ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد؟ ﻳﻚ اﻳﺪه اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف )ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ(‬
‫راﺑﻄﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ را آﺳﺎن ﺗﺮ از ﺑﻘﻴﺔ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ. اﻳﻦ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ، ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ‬
‫درك ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ و اﻧﺘﻘﺎل آﻧﻬﺎ را ﺳﻬﻞ ﺗﺮ ﻣﻲ ﺳﺎزد اﻣﺎ ﻧﺎم ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﻣﺰﻳﺖ ﺑﺎزﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ‬
‫را ﻫﻢ ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ اﻧﺘﻘﺎل دارد. اﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﻛﺎرﺑﺮد ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﺷﻜﻠﻲ از ﻧﻮﺳﺎزي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻫﻢ در‬
‫ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد. ﻛﺎرﺑﺮدﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ اﺳﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻧﺎﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ اﻓﺰودن ﺗﺎزﮔﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ذﻫﻨﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ از اﻳﻦ‬
‫٩ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫دﺳﺘﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ. اﺗﺨﺎد ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ اﻳﻦ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ را از اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻧﺎﺧﻮاﺳﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺼﻮن ﻣﻲ دارد. ﻛﻠﺮ )3002( ﻣﻲ ﮔﻮﻳﺪ »ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﻛﻮﺗﺎه ﺷﺪه ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮه ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﻧﺎﺧﻮاﺳﺘﻪ اي را اﻟﻘﺎ‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪ.« ﻳﺎ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﺑﺮاي ﻧﺰدﻳﻚ ﺷﺪن ﺑﻪ ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﻧﺎم ﺧﻮد را ﻛﻮﺗﺎه ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﻣﺜﻼً ﻛﻤﭙﺎﻧﻲ ‪Federal‬‬
‫‪ Express‬ﻧﺎم ﺧﻮد را ﺑﻪ ‪ FedEx‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ داد درﺣﺎﻟﻴﻜﻪ ﻗﺒﻞ از آن ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن اﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ را ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻧﺎم ﻣﻲ ﺧﻮاﻧﺪﻧﺪ!‬
‫ﻟﺬا اﻳﻦ ﻓﺎﻛﺘﻮر ﺗﺠﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﺎﻫﺶ اﺛﺮ ﺑﺎزﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ را ﺧﻨﺜﻲ ﻧﻤﻤﻮده و ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺷﻮد ﺗﺎ ﻣﺼﺮف‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف، ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ، ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻧﻲ در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﻓﺮض 3‪ :a‬ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎم اﺻﻠﻲ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه را ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر‬
‫ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ وﺟﻮد، در ﻣﻮرد ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺧﺎرج از ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف، اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﺑﺮ روي ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ اﺛﺮﮔﺬار ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد. از آﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎﻧﻲ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎرﻫﺎي ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ ﺳﺎده ﺗﺮي از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ‬
‫دارﻧﺪ، ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﺧﻮرد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﻟﺬا ﻫﻴﭻ ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ ﺳﻨﺦ ﺑﻨﺪي اي رخ ﻧﻤﻲدﻫﺪ.‬
‫در ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻲ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﺰﻳﺖ دارد ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ در ﺑﻴﻦ ﮔﺮوه ﺟﺪﻳﺪي از ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ و‬
‫ﻟﺬا ﻳﻚ ﺳﻴﮕﻨﺎل ﺿﻌﻴﻒ و در ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎل ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮاي آﻧﻬﺎ ارﺳﺎل ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد. ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎً، اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻣﻞ، ﻋﻤﻮﻣﺎً ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺪاﻋﻲ ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ و ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ آﮔﺎﻫﻲ ﻧﻔﻮذ دارد ﺣﺘﻲ در ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻏﻴﺮ ﺑﺎزار‬
‫ﻫﺪف.‬
‫ﻓﺮض 3‪ :b‬ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻏﻴﺮ ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ اﺻﻠﻲ را ﺑﻬﺘﺮ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺪه ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ.‬

‫روش‬
‫روش ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ دو ﻣﺮﺣﻠﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ اول ﺑﺮاي اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ دوم ﺷﺎﻣﻞ دو‬
‫آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﺑﺮاي آزﻣﻮن ﻧﻤﻮدن ﻓﺮض ﻫﺎ.‬
‫ﭘﻴﺶ اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺮاي اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﻬﺖ اﻧﺠﺎم ﺗﺴﺖ ﻫﺎ ﺑﺮ روي آﻧﻬﺎ، از ﮔﺮوﻫﻲ ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ از 21 داﻧﺸﺠﻮي رﺷﺘﺔ ‪business‬‬
‫اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﻮرد ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ در ﺑﺎزار ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﺑﻮده، در ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن داراي ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﻻ‬
‫٠١ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺑﻮده و در ﺣﺎل ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﮔﺴﺘﺮده ﺑﺮ روي آﻧﻬﺎ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ اﻧﺠﺎم ﻧﺸﺪه ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. دو ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻟﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺮار اﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻫﺮﻳﻚ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ دو ﭘﺘﺎﻧﺴﻴﻞ را داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، اول اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﻨﺪة ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻗﺎدر ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ آن ﺑﺎﺷﺪ و دوم اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻳﻜﻲ از آﻧﻬﺎ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﻮده و دﻳﮕﺮي ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ. ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ اﻳﻦ ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ ﭘﻴﺶ‬
‫اﻧﺘﺨﺎب در ﺟﺪول 1 ﻧﺸﺎن داده ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ:‬
‫ﺟﺪول 1‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬

‫دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اﺻﻠﻲ‬

‫‪Sodimac‬‬

‫‪ Homecenter‬‬

‫‪ Pepsodent‬‬

‫ﺧﻤﻴﺮدﻧﺪان‬

‫دﺳﺘﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎدي‬

‫ﻣﻴﺰان ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل‬

‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ(‬

‫ﻣﺮﻛﺰ آﻣﻮزش ﻓﻨﻲ‬

‫ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ‬

‫‪ Soditech‬‬

‫ﻛﻔﺶ و ﻳﻮﻧﻴﻔﻮرم ﻛﺎر‬

‫ﺑﺎﻻ‬

‫‪Sodicloth‬‬

‫ﭘﻮدر ﺑﭽﻪ‬

‫ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ‬

‫‪Pepsofeet‬‬

‫ﻧﺮم ﻛﻨﻨﺪة ﻟﺐ‬

‫ﺑﺎﻻ‬

‫‪ Peplips‬‬

‫ﺑﺮاي اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﻔﻬﻤﻴﻢ آﻳﺎ داﻧﺸﺠﻮﻳﺎن ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻫﺪف ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻣﻮرد ﻧﻈﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻪ، از 03‬
‫داﻧﺸﺠﻮي دﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻴﺰ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. آﻧﻬﺎ ﮔﺰارش ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ آﻳﺎ اﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺑﺮاي رﻓﻊ ﻧﻴﺎزﻫﺎي آﻧﻬﺎ اراﺋﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺪه اﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻪ. ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮر ﻛﻪ اﻧﺘﻈﺎر ﻣﻲ رﻓﺖ، آﻧﻬﺎ ‪) Pepsodent‬ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺎﻓﻈﺖ دﻧﺪان( را ﺑﺮﻧﺪي آﺷﻨﺎ‬
‫ﮔﺰارش دادﻧﺪ وﻟﻲ ‪) Sodimac‬ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ ‪ (homecenter‬ﺑﺮﻧﺪي ﻧﺒﻮد ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻴﺎزﻫﺎي آﻧﺎن ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎت ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺮاي آزﻣﻮن ﻛﺮدن ﻓﺮض ﻫﺎ، ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن دو آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ را ﻃﺮاﺣﻲ ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ. آﻧﻬﺎ از ﻳﻚ راﺑﻄﺔ 2×2 ﺑﻴﻦ »ﻣﻴﺰان‬
‫ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ« )ﺑﺎﻻ ﻳﺎ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ( و »اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ« )ﻧﺎم ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ( ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻫﺎي ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ‬
‫اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ. آﻧﻬﺎ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ دﻳﮕﺮي ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮاي آزﻣﻮن ﻛﺮدن اﺛﺮ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي روي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻃﺮاﺣﻲ‬
‫ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ. در اﻳﻦ آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ ﻫﻢ از راﺑﻄﺔ 2×2 ﺑﻴﻦ »ﻣﻴﺰان ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ« )ﺑﺎﻻ ﻳﺎ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ( و ﻫﻤﺎن »اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي‬
‫اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ« اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ. در ﺑﺨﺶ ﺑﻌﺪي ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮرت ﺟﺰﻳﻲ ﺗﺮي ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ آزﻣﺎﻳﺸﻬﺎ و ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ آﻧﻬﺎ ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ.‬
‫آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ اول: ﻣﻴﺰان ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل و اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف‬
‫ﺑﺮاي اﻧﺠﺎم اﻳﻦ آزﻣﻮن از 421 ﻧﻔﺮ داﻧﺸﺠﻮ ﻛﻪ 95% آﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺮد و 14% آﻧﻬﺎ زن ﺑﻮدﻧﺪ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺷﺪ. اﺑﺘﺪا ﺑﺎ‬
‫اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺳﻮاﻻﺗﻲ، ﻧﻈﺮات و ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ آﻧﻬﺎ را از دو ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﺷﺎن ﭘﺮﺳﻴﺪه ﺷﺪ. ﺳﭙﺲ ﺑﻪ آﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫١١ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ دو ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻫﺮﻳﻚ ﻗﺼﺪ اراﺋﺔ دو ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﻳﻜﻲ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ و دﻳﮕﺮي ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت از ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻓﻌﻠﻲ( را‬
‫دارﻧﺪ. ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺷﻮﻧﺪﮔﺎن، ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را ﺑﺪون ﻫﻴﭻ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت دﻳﮕﺮي درﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻛﺮده و ﻧﻈﺮات ﺧﻮد را‬
‫درﺑﺎرة آﻧﻬﺎ در ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮاﻻت ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻲ اراﺋﻪ ﻣﻲ دادﻧﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﺳﻮاﻻت ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻋﻤﺪه ﺣﻮل ﺳﻪ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع وﺟﻬﺔ‬
‫ﻛﻠﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺟﺬاﺑﻴﺖ آن و ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﻮدن آن ﺑﻮدﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ اول‬
‫ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ از آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ اول ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻋﺎﻣﻠﻲ ﻳﻜﻄﺮﻓﻪ )‪ (ANOVA‬ﺑﺎ در ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﻣﻴﺰان ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺑﻪ دﺳﺖ آﻣﺪ ﻛﻪ در ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻓﺮض 1‪ a‬ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﮔﺮدﻳﺪ. ﺟﻬﺖ آزﻣﻮن ﻛﺮدن ﻓﺮﺿﻬﺎي 1‪ b‬و 1‪ ،c‬ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎي ﻋﺎﻣﻠﻲ ﻳﻜﻄﺮﻓﻪ اي ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻃﻮر ﺟﺪاﮔﺎﻧﻪ روي دوﺳﻮم ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎ اﻧﺠﺎم ﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ در ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﻓﺮض 1‪ b‬ﻳﻌﻨﻲ اﺛﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ در ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ از ﻧﻮع ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد. ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻓﺮض 1‪ c‬ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد‬
‫ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل، ﺑﺮاي اﻧﻮاع ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎظ ﺷﻜﻠﻲ، ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﻧﻤﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﺟﺪول 2 ﻣﻘﺎدﻳﺮ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ )اﻧﺤﺮاف ﻣﻌﻴﺎر( و ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ‪ANOVA‬‬

‫ﺟﺪول 3 ﻣﻘﺎدﻳﺮ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ )اﻧﺤﺮاف ﻣﻌﻴﺎر( ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬

‫٢١ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺟﺪول 3 ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ در ﻫﺮ دو ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮد ﺑﻬﺘﺮي ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎظ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن داﺷﺘﻪ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﻣﻴﺰان ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻬﺖ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اوﻟﻴﻪ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﻨﺪه اي در ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ )ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻓﺮض 1‪.(a‬‬
‫ﺟﺪول 4 ﻣﻘﺎدﻳﺮ ‪ F‐values‬و ‪ p‐levels‬ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬

‫ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ دﻗﻴﻖ ﺗﺮ ﺟﺪاول 3و4 ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﺪ ﻣﺎ را ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ آزﻣﻮن ﻛﺮدن اﺛﺮ ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف رﻫﻨﻤﻮن ﺳﺎزد. ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ آزﻣﻮن‬
‫‪ F‬ﺑﺮاي اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ ﺑﺮاي ﻫﺮ دو ﺳﻨﺎرﻳﻮ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﻨﺪ. ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﺣﺎل ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري ﺑﺮاي‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺮاي ﻫﺮ ﺳﻨﺎرﻳﻮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت اﺳﺖ )ﺟﺪول 3(. در ﻣﻮرد ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت دﻧﺪاﻧﭙﺰﺷﻜﻲ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺑﻬﺘﺮي‬
‫را ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﺮده اﺳﺖ. اﻳﻦ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ، ﻓﺮض 3‪ a‬را ﻛﻪ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻬﻲ را ﺑﺮاي ﻫﺮ دو ﺳﻨﺎرﻳﻮ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﻛﺮده ﺑﻮد ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. در ﻣﻮرد ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ‪ ،homecenter‬اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﻧﺎم ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﻬﺘﺮي را ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه دارد ﻛﻪ‬
‫درواﻗﻊ ﻣﻮﻳﺪ ﻓﺮض 3‪ b‬ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ دﻗﻴﻖ ﺗﺮ ﻣﻘﺎدﻳﺮ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ ﺟﺪول 1، اﺛﺮ ﻣﺘﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻬﺖ دﺳﺘﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل و اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري را ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ. وﻗﺘﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن، در ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻫﻢ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ،‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎوﺗﻲ در ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ آﻧﻬﺎ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻮرد اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ دﻳﺪه ﻧﻤﻲ ﺷﻮد. در ﻣﻮرد ﻣﺤﺼﻮل‬
‫ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ، ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎم ﻛﻮﺗﺎﻫﺘﺮ را ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ ﺟﺎﻟﺐ اﺳﺖ ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﻋﻼﻗﻪ دارﻧﺪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت را ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ اﻓﺮاد ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎم ﻛﻮﺗﺎهﺗﺮ و ﻣﺴﺘﻌﺎر ﺻﺪا ﺑﺰﻧﻨﺪ ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻧﻮع ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎ،‬
‫اﻃﻼﻋﺎت را ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﻣﻨﺘﻘﻞ ﻛﺮده )‪ (signaling theory‬و ﻳﺎ اﺣﺘﻤﺎﻻً ﻧﺰدﻳﻜﻲ و ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ را ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮرﺗﻲ واﻗﻌﻲ ﺗﺮ ﺑﻴﺎن‬
‫ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ )ﺗﺌﻮرﻳﻬﺎي ﺣﺴﻲ و اﻧﮕﻴﺰﺷﻲ(. ﺑﺮﺧﻼف اﺳﺘﺪﻻل ﻗﺒﻠﻲ، ﻫﻴﭻ اﺛﺮ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻠﻲ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻲ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﻴﺰان ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل و اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري در ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ دﻳﺪه ﻧﺸﺪ.‬

‫٣١ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ دوم: ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي‬
‫اﻳﻦ آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ، ﻓﺮض ﻫﺎي 2‪ a‬و 2‪ b‬را آزﻣﻮن ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. ﻓﺮض ﻛﻠﻴﺪي اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺰﻳﺖ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي‬
‫ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺷﺪت اﺛﺮات ﻣﺸﺘﺮك را ﻛﻢ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. در اﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ از راﺑﻄﺔ 2×2 ﺑﻴﻦ دو ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻴﺰان‬
‫ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ )ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺎﻣﻮﻓﻖ( و اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري )ﻧﺎم ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ( ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻫﺎي‬
‫ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺷﺪه در ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ، در ﺟﺪول 1 آﻣﺪه اﻧﺪ. ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻳﻚ ﻗﺴﻤﺖ اﺻﻠﻲ ﭼﻬﺎرﺣﺮﻓﻲ )‪ (Sodi‬ﻳﺎ ﺳﻪ ﺣﺮﻓﻲ )‪ (Pep‬از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه ﻳﻚ ﻛﻠﻤﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ‬
‫دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺳﺖ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﺎت ﻟﻐﻮي ﻫﻤﮕﻲ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻲ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺑﺎ اﻗﺪاﻣﺎت‬
‫ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻓﻌﻠﻲ و ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ در ﻣﻮرد اﺛﺮات ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺪاﻫﺎي‬
‫اﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻲ ﻧﺰدﻳﻚ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ )در ﻛﺸﻮرﻫﺎي اﺳﭙﺎﻧﻴﺎﻳﻲ زﺑﺎن( از ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﺘﺮي در ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺻﺪاﻫﺎي اﺳﭙﺎﻧﻴﺎﻳﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺧﻮردار ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﮔﺮوه ﺟﺪﻳﺪي ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ از 501 داﻧﺸﺠﻮي رﺷﺘﺔ ‪ business‬در اﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﺮده اﻧﺪ. در اﺑﺘﺪا ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻫﺮﻳﻚ از 4 ﮔﺮوه ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن اﻃﻼﻋﺎﺗﻲ در ﻣﻮرد دﺳﺖ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي آﻧﻬﺎ داده ﺷﺪ و‬
‫ﺳﭙﺲ آﻧﻬﺎ را از ﻣﻴﺰان ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﻫﺮﻳﻚ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ در ﺑﺎزار ﻣﻄﻠﻊ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻨﺪ و دﻻﻳﻞ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻲ ﺑﺮاي آن را ﻫﻢ‬
‫ﺷﺮح دادﻧﺪ. ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن در ﭘﻴﻤﺎﻳﺶ، ﭘﺲ از درﻳﺎﻓﺖ اﻳﻦ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺧﻮد را از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ اﻋﻼم ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ اول، ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻳﻚ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ واﺑﺴﺘﻪ، ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻘﻴﺎس 7ﺗﺎﻳﻲ ﻟﻴﻜﺮت اﻧﺪازه-‬
‫ﮔﻴﺮي ﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ دوم‬
‫ﺑﺮاي آزﻣﻮن ﻛﺮدن ﻓﺮض ﻫﺎي 2‪ a‬و 2‪ ،b‬ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن، از ﻳﻚ آزﻣﻮن ﻳﻚ ﻃﺮﻓﺔ ‪ ANOVA‬ﺑﺎ در ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺑﺮاي ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎي »ﻓﻘﻂ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ« و »ﻓﻘﻂ ﭘﻴﺮوزي« اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﺮده اﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﺮاي اﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻓﻘﻂ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ، ﻳﻚ اﺛﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﺮ روي ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ وﻗﺘﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ، دﻳﺪه ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد. ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﺣﺎﻟﺖ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ 8/4 و ﺑﺮاي‬
‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ، 4/5 ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﻳﺪ ﻓﺮض 2‪ a‬ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬

‫٤١ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺟﺪول 5 ﻣﻘﺎدﻳﺮ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ )اﻧﺤﺮاف ﻣﻌﻴﺎر( ﺑﺮاي آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ دوم‬

‫در ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻓﻘﻂ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ، ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﻔﺎوت ﭼﺸﻤﮕﻴﺮي ﺑﻴﻦ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ اﺻﻠﻲ و ﻳﺎ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ دﻳﺪه ﻧﻤﻲ ﺷﻮد ﻟﺬا ﻓﺮض 2‪ b‬ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻧﻤﻲﮔﺮدد.‬
‫ﺟﺪول 6 ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻮاﻗﻊ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺿﺮر ﻛﻤﺘﺮي ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫اﺻﻠﻲ وارد ﻣﻲ آورﻧﺪ و در ﻣﻮاﻗﻊ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ، اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري اﺛﺮات ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ دارﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺿﻮع اﺛﺮ ﺣﻔﺎﻇﺘﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ را ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﺟﺪول 6 ﻣﻘﺎدﻳﺮ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ )اﻧﺤﺮاف ﻣﻌﻴﺎر( ﺑﺮاي ﺷﺮاﻳﻂ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ‬

‫ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻣﻘﺎدﻳﺮ ﺟﺪول 7، ﻣﻲﺗﻮان ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري در ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ اﻫﻤﻴﺖ دارد.‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎً ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه، اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺟﺎﻟﺒﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﺗﺤﺖ ﭘﻮﺷﺶ ﻗﺮار دادن رﻳﺴﻚ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و اﺛﺮات‬
‫ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي ﻣﺤﺴﻮب ﻣﻲﮔﺮدد.‬
‫ﺟﺪول 7 ﻣﻘﺎدﻳﺮ ‪ F‐value‬و ‪ p‐level‬ﺑﺮاي آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ دوم‬

‫٥١ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻓﺮض 2‪ a‬ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد. ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﺣﺎل 2‪ b‬ﻛﻪ وﺟﻮد ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﻣﺘﻘﺎرن را در ﺳﻨﺎرﻳﻮي ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﭘﻴﺶ‬
‫ﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﻣﻲ ﻛﺮد ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻧﻤﻲ ﮔﺮدد ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ در ﻣﻮارد ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي، ﻣﻘﺎدﻳﺮ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ ﺑﺮاي ﻫﺮ دو ﻧﻮع اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي‬
‫ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري ﻳﻜﺴﺎن اﺳﺖ.‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ، ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪات ﻣﻬﻤﻲ در راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ دﺳﺖ ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ وﻗﺘﻲ‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖآﻣﻴﺰ اﺳﺖ، اﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﺴﻨﺎت ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ را ﺑﻪ ارث ﺑﺮده و زﻣﺎﻧﻲ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﻣﻮاﺟﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﺣﻜﻢ ﻣﺤﺎﻓﻆ ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﺤﺴﻮب ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدﻧﺪ. ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ، ﻃﺒﻖ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ، اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ، ﺳﻮدﻣﻨﺪﺗﺮ از اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ.‬

‫ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ در آن از ﺑﺨﺸﻲ از ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫اﺻﻠﻲ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد )ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ‪ Nestea‬و ﻳﺎ ‪ .(Peplips‬ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ، اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺪارﻛﻲ اراﺋﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ دال ﺑﺮ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﻛﻪ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺘﻲ ﺑﺮ ﻧﺤﻮة ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ( دارد.‬
‫ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮاﻳﻦ، وﺟﻮد ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ در ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻳﻜﻲ از اﺑﻌﺎد ﻛﻠﻴﺪي »ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ«، ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻬﻲ ﺑﺮ ﻧﺤﻮة ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ‬
‫از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه و ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ دارد. ﺟﺎﻟﺒﺘﺮ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ اﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺷﻮاﻫﺪي را ﻧﻴﺰ در ارﺗﺒﺎط ﺑﺎ ﺗﺌﻮري ﺳﻨﺦ‬
‫ﺑﻨﺪي ﻓﺮﻋﻲ1، ﺷﺎﺧﻪ اي از ﺗﺌﻮري دﺳﺘﻪ ﺑﻨﺪي ﻛﻪ در ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﮓ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﮔﺴﺘﺮده اي ﻣﻮرداﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻗﺮار ﻣﻲ-‬
‫ﮔﻴﺮد، اراﺋﻪ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ. اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ، روش اﻳﻤﻦﺗﺮي ﺑﺮاي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻲ-‬
‫رﺳﺪ اﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ از ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﺧﻮردن ﻣﺼﻮن ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ. اﻣﺎ در ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎل، آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺟﺎزه ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ از‬
‫وﺟﻬﻪ و ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺟﺎ اﻓﺘﺎدة ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻬﺮه ﺑﺮده و ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺧﻮد را ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺎزﮔﺮداﻧﻨﺪ.‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ ﻣﺼﻮن ﺳﺎزي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و اﺛﺮ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي ﻣﺜﺒﺖ دﻗﻴﻘﺎً ﺑﻪ ﭼﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻲ و در ﻛﺠﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎر ﻣﻲ اﻓﺘﺪ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺎز ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎرﻫﺎي ﺗﺌﻮرﻳﻚ و ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ دارد. ﺑﺮاي دﺳﺘﻴﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺤﺎت دﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ و ﻋﻤﻴﻖﺗﺮ، ﺑﺤﺜﻬﺎي ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮي ﺗﻨﻮع، اﺛﺮات ﻧﻮآوري و ﻣﺤﺮﻛﻬﺎي ﺣﺴﻲ، زﻣﻴﻨﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺗﻲ ﻣﻔﻴﺪي ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ.‬
‫در ﻳﻚ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﺔ ﺟﺎﻟﺐ دﻳﮕﺮ، ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ، ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﺧﻮد را ﺑﺮ اﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف و اﺛﺮات آن ﮔﺬاﺷﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ. ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ‬
‫ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ( ﺑﺎ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن دﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت اﺳﺖ و ﺑﺮ اﻳﻦ‬
‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫ ‪ Subtypification theory‬‬

‫٦١ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬

‫اﺳﺎس اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮرﺗﻬﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻲ در ﻣﻲ آﻳﻨﺪ: ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻗﺪﻳﻤﻲ، وﻓﺎدار و اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺎدر و‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺟﺪﻳﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪﻫﺎ، ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮاي ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت آﺗﻲ و ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺪﻳﺮان، اﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺑﺴﺰاﻳﻲ دارد. ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ‬
‫درﺳﺖ از وﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف، روﻳﺔ ﻣﻬﻤﻲ ﺑﺮاي اﻃﻤﻴﻨﺎن از اﻋﺘﺒﺎر و ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻗﻴﺎس ﺑﻮدن ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻤﺎر ﻣﻲ-‬
‫رود.‬
‫اﮔﺮﭼﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺎز ﺑﻪ آزﻣﻮﻧﻬﺎي دﻳﮕﺮي ﺑﺎ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎي ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت دارﻧﺪ، وﻟﻲ‬
‫ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻲ را ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ. ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ، ﺑﺎﻳﺪ درك ﺑﻬﺘﺮي از اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع ﺑﻪ دﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺑﻴﺎﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﺮا در ﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﻧﺎم ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ، ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻬﻲ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺛﺮ ﻣﻲﮔﺬارﻧﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼوه، اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﭼﺮا ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف، ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و اﺳﺎﻣﻲ ﻣﺴﺘﻌﺎر را‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ، ﺧﻮد زﻣﻴﻨﺔ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎﺗﻲ دﻳﮕﺮي اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ اﻫﻤﻴﺖ آن ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، در‬
‫ﻣﺒﺤﺚ ﻛﻠﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬

‫٧١ ‬
‫ ‬

:‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ دوم‬

‫ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬ Brand extension feedback: The role of advertising

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ‬

‫ﭼﻜﻴﺪه‬
‫ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺧﻮد، اﻏﻠﺐ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ. اﮔﺮﭼﻪ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي‬
‫رﻳﺴﻚ ﻛﻤﺮﻧﮓ ﺷﺪن ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ را ﺑﻪ دﻧﺒﺎل دارد. ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮر درك ﻧﺤﻮة ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن از‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ، اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ، ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﻣﺘﺪﻟﻮژي ﻣﻌﺎدﻻت ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎري1، ﻳﻚ ﻣﺪل ﻧﻈﺮي را‬
‫ارﺋﻪ و ﺑﺮآورد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺑﺮآورد ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻃﺮز ﻧﮕﺮش ﺑﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ، ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺛﺮ ﮔﺬاﺷﺘﻪ‬
‫و اﻳﻨﻜﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻧﮕﺮش، ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪ اﺣﺴﺎس اوﻟﻴﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و واﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ آن ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺳﺖ. ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ‬
‫ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪاي ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻧﻤﻮدن ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﻛﺎﻓﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺪن ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ، روش‬
‫ﻛﺎراﻳﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﺣﻔﺎﻇﺖ از ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻛﻠﻴﺪي: ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬

‫ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ‬
‫رواﻧﻪ ﻛﺮدن ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزار، ﻳﻚ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺖ ﺗﺠﺎري ﭘﺮ رﻳﺴﻚ و ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪﺑﺮ اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺎ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻧﺮخ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ‬
‫اﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻻً ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻨﺘﺮ از 05% اﺳﺖ، ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ اﻏﻠﺐ ﺑﻪ دﻧﺒﺎل اﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎرﮔﻴﺮي اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺧﻮد را ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮرت ﻫﺮﭼﻪ ﺟﺬاب ﺗﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن و ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻮزﻳﻊ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اراﺋﻪ دﻫﻨﺪ. ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮر از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﻧﺎم ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻮﺟﻮد ﺑﺮاي ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ دﺳﺘﻪ2ﻫﺎي ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از‬
‫ﻗﺪرت ﻧﻔﻮذ و ارزش اﻳﺠﺎد ﺷﺪه ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ در ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺳﺖ. ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ ﺗﻘﺎﺿﺎ، ارزش اﻧﺘﻘﺎل‬
‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ، ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد ﺗﺎ از ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪﻫﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ و ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺟﺘﻨﺎب‬
‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫ ‪ Structural equation methodology‬‬
‫‪ Category‬‬

‫٢‬

‫٩١ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫ﮔﺮدد. اﻳﻦ ﻣﺰﻳﺖ و ﺑﺴﻴﺎري ﻣﺰاﻳﺎي دﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺷﺪهاﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﻜﻲ از راﻳﺞ ﺗﺮﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎ در‬
‫ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺪﻳﺮان ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ‬
‫وﻗﺘﻲ ﺑﺤﺚ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ و ﻳﺎ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﻳﻚ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ﻣﻴﺎن اﺳﺖ، ﻻزم اﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ1 ﺑﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﮔﺮدد. ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻣﺪام در ﺣﺎل ﻣﺒﺎدﻟﺔ داﻧﺴﺘﻪﻫﺎ و ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﺧﻮد از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫اﺻﻠﻲ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺳﺖ و ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮات اﻳﺠﺎد ﺷﺪه در ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از‬
‫ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن »اﺛﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ« ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺎن اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﻛﺮدهاﻧﺪ در ﺣﺎﻟﻴﻜﻪ »اﺛﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻜﻮس« ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺮ روي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري را ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮد ﺟﻠﺐ ﻛﺮده اﺳﺖ‬
‫ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻛﻤﺮﻧﮓ ﺷﺪن ﺗﺪاﻋﻲ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﻳﺠﺎد ﺷﺪه ﮔﺮدد. ‬
‫ﺑﺮاي اﺟﺘﻨﺎب از اﻳﻦ وﺿﻌﻴﺖ، ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ از اﺑﺰارﻫﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻛﻤﭙﻴﻨﻬﺎي ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻗﺎدر ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را ﺑﻬﺒﻮد دﻫﻨﺪ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﻨﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﻫﻤﺔ دﻻﻳﻞ ﻣﻄﺮح ﺷﺪه، اﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺗﺠﺰﻳﻪ و ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ آﺛﺎر و ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪﻫﺎي اراﺋﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻫﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺎن ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﺎ اراﺋﺔ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺪل ﻧﻈﺮي، ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ اﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎ را ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ داده و ﺑﺎ ﻟﺤﺎظ ﻛﺮدن‬
‫ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻳﻚ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺗﻌﺪﻳﻞﮔﺮ، ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪﻫﺎي آﻧﻬﺎ را ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﻠﻲ اﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺎن دادن اﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻄﻮر ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﺗﺠﺎري ﻗﺎدر ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه را ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮر ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ،‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﻠﺐ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ، ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻗﺒﻠﻲ را ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺨﺸﺪ.‬

‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫از زﻣﺎن ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺑﻮش و دﻳﮕﺮان )8991(، ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﮔﺴﺘﺮده اي ﺑﺮ روي اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻛﺎر‬
‫ﻛﺮدهاﻧﺪ. ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮ روي ﻧﺤﻮة ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ و اﺧﻴﺮاً ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮ روي ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﺘﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﺷﺪه اﻧﺪ. ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﺷﺒﻜﻪ اي از ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ اﺳﺖ. وﻗﺘﻲ ﻓﺮد‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ روﺑﺮو ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد، اﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ، ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎر ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ ﺧﻮد را ﺑﺎ ﺷﺮاﻳﻂ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ وﻓﻖ داده و ﺑﻪ دﻧﺒﺎل‬
‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻬﺎت ﻣﻲﮔﺮدﻧﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪﺳﺎزي ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ2 ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ دارد.‬
‫ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮاﻳﻦ وﺟﻮد ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ زﻳﺎد ﺑﺎﻋﺚ وﻗﻮع ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪﺳﺎزي ﺷﺪه و ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘﺎٌ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺜﺒﻴﺖ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‬
‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫‪ Associations‬‬
‫‪ Fit‬‬

‫٢‬

‫٠٢ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎر ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ ﻣﻲﮔﺮدد. اﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺨﺎﻧﻪاي، ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و اوﻟﻴﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮﮔﺬار ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ ﺑﻮد، اﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪاي ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﭼﺸﻤﮕﻴﺮي ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻮدهاﻧﺪ، ﻳﻚ‬
‫دﺳﺘﻪﺑﻨﺪي ﺟﺪاﮔﺎﻧﻪ اﻳﺠﺎد ﻧﻤﻮدهاﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﺳﻨﺠﺶ ﻧﻮع ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ و ﻣﻌﻴﺎرﻫﺎي ذﻫﻨﻲ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻬﻤﻲ در ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺤﺴﻮب ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد.‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎرﺑﺮي آﻧﻬﺎ از ﺻﻔﺎت ﻏﻴﺮﻣﻠﻤﻮس و ﺳﻤﺒﻠﻴﻚ اﺳﺘﻨﺒﺎط ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد، در اﻳﺠﺎد ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ راﺣﺖ ﺗﺮ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي داراي ﺻﻔﺎت ﻛﺎرﻛﺮدي و ﻣﻠﻤﻮس راﺣﺖ ﺗﺮ ﺗﻌﻤﻴﻢ داده ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ. ﺑﺮﺧﻲ‬
‫دﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ذﻫﻨﻴﺖ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﺷﺪﻳﺪاً ﺑﻪ درﻳﺎﻓﺘﻬﺎي وي از ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ دارد. ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎرت دﻳﮕﺮ، ﻣﻴﺰان‬
‫دﺷﻮاري ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ و دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻧﻴﺰ از ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺬارﻧﺪ. از دﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻈﺮات‬
‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮد در ادﺑﻴﺎت ﻣﻮﺿﻮع، وﺟﻮد راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ و ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺑﻬﺒﻮد ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ و ﻛﻤﻚ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻤﺮﻧﮓ ﻧﺸﺪن آن ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ﻛﻪ ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺪﻳﺮﻳﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺧﻮد آن را ﻛﻨﺘﺮل ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت اﺳﺖ. ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﻠﻲ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ارﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎت روي وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺰان ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﺔ ﺻﺮف ﺷﺪه ﺑﺮاي ارﺗﺒﺎط و ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﻮع ﭘﻴﺎﻣﻲ دارد ﻛﻪ در روﻧﺪ‬
‫ارﺗﺒﺎط داده ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد. ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻣﻮرد اول، ﺑﺴﻴﺎري ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت راﺑﻄﺔ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد.‬
‫در راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻮرد دوم، ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ارﺗﺒﺎﻃﻲ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوﺗﻲ را ﺑﺮاي اﻓﺰاﻳﺶ ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ درك‬
‫ﺷﺪه ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه و ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻊ آن، اﻓﺰاﻳﺶ اﻗﺒﺎل وي ﭘﻴﺎده ﺳﺎزﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺳﻠﺴﻪ ﻣﺮاﺗﺐ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات1 ﺑﺮاي ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺔ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ رﻓﺘﺎر ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﺑﺮ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻔﻴﺪ اﺳﺖ. ﻃﺒﻖ اﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪ، ﻫﺪف اول ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﻓﺮوش ﻧﻴﺴﺖ، ﺑﻠﻜﻪ اﻓﺰاﻳﺶ آﮔﺎﻫﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ وﺟﻮد ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﺻﻔﺎت و‬
‫وﻳﮋﮔﻴﻬﺎي آن اﺳﺖ. در ﺻﻮرﺗﻴﻜﻪ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ در اﻳﻦ ﻫﺪف ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﻪ اﺣﺘﻤﺎل زﻳﺎد اﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را‬
‫اﻣﺘﺤﺎن ﻛﺮده و ﺑﻪ آن وﻓﺎدار ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدﻧﺪ. ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻫﺎ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ اﻓﺰاﻳﺶ ﻓﺮوش، ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺮﻏﻴﺐ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﺑﻪ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از دﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﺣﺘﻲ دﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل )ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺷﺮﻛﺖ( ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻲﮔﺮدد.‬
‫ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ ﺳﻠﺴﻪ ﻣﺮﺗﺐ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات، ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ارﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎت ﺑﺮ ﻣﻌﻴﺎرﻫﺎ و ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻣﺸﺘﺮي، روي‬
‫ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺠﻲﮔﺮي دوﮔﺎﻧﻪ2 )‪ (DMH‬ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﻛﺮده اﻧﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ ادﻋﺎ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ارﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎت ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻗﺒﻮل و ﻣﺘﻘﺎﻋﺪ‬
‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫‪ Hierarchy of effects‬‬
‫ ‪ Dual Mediation Hypothesis‬‬

‫٢‬

‫١٢ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از ﻣﺴﻴﺮﻫﺎي ﻣﺮﻛﺰي و ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪ اي ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ. از ﻳﻚ ﻃﺮف، ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﻣﺮﻛﺰي ﻓﺮض ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫اﻓﺮاد روي ﻣﺤﺘﻮاي ﭘﻴﺎم ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ داﺷﺘﻪ و ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺧﻮد از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، اﺛﺮ وﺟﻬﺔ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت را ﺑﺮ وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻌﺪﻳﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. از ﻃﺮف دﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪاي ﻳﻚ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺑﻴﻦ وﺟﻬﺔ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت و وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ اﻓﺮاد ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺧﻮد را ﻣﻌﻄﻮف ﺑﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺘﻨﻲ از ﻗﺒﻴﻞ ﻣﻮﺳﻴﻘﻲ، اﻟﻤﺎﻧﻬﺎي ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮي و... ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ ﻧﻤﻮد.‬

‫ﭼﺎرﭼﻮب ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻲ و ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ ﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن در ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻗﺒﻠﻲ، ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎت ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺗﺤﺖ ﻋﻨﻮان ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ1 ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮده و ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات اﺑﻌﺎد ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ آن را ﺑﺮ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻧﻤﻮده اﻧﺪ. در‬
‫ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ2، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ3 و وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ4 ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان اﺑﻌﺎد اﺻﻠﻲ ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه‬
‫اﻧﺪ. ﺑﻌﺪ اول ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ اﺷﺎره ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮاﻧﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺮدم در ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎ آوردن و ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎد آوردن ﺑﺮﻧﺪي ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻟﻲ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‬
‫را اراﺋﻪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ دارد. ﺑﻌﺪ دوم، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، اﺷﺎره ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮداﺷﺘﻬﺎي ذﻫﻨﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ واﺳﻄﺔ‬
‫ارﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎت ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎزار ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻫﺎي ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺼﺮف‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻬﺘﺮي اﻳﺠﺎد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ اﺛﺮ ‪ halo‬ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ واﺳﻄﺔ آن، اﻓﺮاد، ﺑﺮداﺷﺘﻬﺎي ﺧﻮد را ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺎت ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﺗﻌﻤﻴﻢ داده و ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎر داﻧﺸﻲ ﻛﺎﻣﻠﺘﺮي را‬
‫درﺳﺖ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﻌﺪ ﺳﻮم ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮر از آن ﻳﻚ ﺗﻌﻬﺪ ﺑﻠﻨﺪﻣﺪت ﺑﻪ ﺧﺮﻳﺪ دوﺑﺎره ﺑﻮده و‬
‫ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﻣﻜﺮر و وﺟﻬﺔ ﻣﻄﻠﻮب را ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد. وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ از ﺑﺮداﺷﺘﻬﺎ و ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﻣﺜﺒﺖ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻲ آﻳﺪ.‬
‫ﻃﺒﻖ ﺷﻮاﻫﺪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ، اﻳﻦ اﺑﻌﺎد ﻳﻚ ﺳﺮي ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﺑﺮ ﻫﻤﺪﻳﮕﺮ دارﻧﺪ. ﻟﺬا دو ﻓﺮض اول ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻋﺒﺎرﺗﻨﺪ از:‬
‫1‪ :H‬ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ دارد.‬
‫2‪ :H‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮ وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد.‬
‫ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﺟﺎﻧﺴﻮن و وﻳﻠﺴﻮن )3991(، ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ ورود ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزارﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪﺣﺎل ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻟﻲ ﺑﺮاي آﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﺪاﺷﺘﻪ-‬
‫اﻧﺪ، درواﻗﻊ ﺑﺮ روي ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺧﻮد ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﮔﺬاري ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪه ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲدﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻴﺰان داﻧﺶ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫‪ Brand equity‬‬
‫ ‪ Brand awareness‬‬
‫٣‬
‫ ‪ Brand image‬‬
‫٤‬
‫ ‪ Brand loyalty‬‬
‫٢‬

‫٢٢ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺑﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ دارد. از ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮ، ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎﻧﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ دﺳﺘﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل آﺷﻨﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻤﺘﺮي‬
‫داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ، ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﻟﺬا ﻫﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺘﻲ ﻛﻪ از ﻣﺤﺼﻮل‬
‫ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ درك ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد. از ﻃﺮف دﻳﮕﺮ، ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﻣﻜﺮر در ﻣﻌﺮض ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺮك، ﻣﺜﻞ‬
‫ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺑﺮاي آن ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ. وﻗﺘﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎر ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ ﺧﻮد را ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻲ-‬
‫دﻫﺪ، ﻫﻢ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﻫﻢ آﻧﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎً ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ، ﻋﻼﻗﻪ و وﺟﻬﻪ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ، ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻤﺎً ﻳﻚ‬
‫ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺗﺮي از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ داد. ﻓﺮﺿﻬﺎي زﻳﺮ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ ﺑﺎﻻ را ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ:‬
‫3‪ :H‬ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد.‬
‫4‪ :H‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد.‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ، وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﻴﺮي ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺛﺮﮔﺬار اﺳﺖ. ﺗﻠﻘﻲ‬
‫از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ وﻗﺘﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﻋﺘﻤﺎد دارد، ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت آن را ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻣﻨﻈﻢ ﻣﻲ ﺧﺮد و ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻬﺪي ﺑﻪ ﺧﺮﻳﺪ دوﺑﺎرة آﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ اﺳﺖ. ﻟﺬا ﻓﺮض ﭘﻨﺠﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮرت زﻳﺮ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد:‬
‫5‪ :H‬وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد.‬
‫ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ درك ﺷﺪه ﻣﻬﻤﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻓﺎﻛﺘﻮر ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ از ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن ﻣﺪﻧﻈﺮ ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫اﺳﺖ. ﻋﻤﻮﻣﺎً، اﺣﺴﺎﺳﺎت ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﻮﺛﺮ ﻣﻲﮔﺮدد در ﺻﻮرﺗﻴﻜﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﭘﻨﻬﺎن در داﻧﺶ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ دﺳﺘﻪ، ﻳﻚ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ را ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻣﻲدﻫﺪ. ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ در ﻋﻮض،‬
‫ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ درك ﺷﺪه ﺑﻴﻦ دﺳﺘﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل و دﺳﺘﺔ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ را و ﻳﺎ ﺑﻴﻦ دﺳﺘﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ را‬
‫اﻧﺪازه ﮔﻴﺮي ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ اوﻟﻴﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﮔﺮدد. درك و درﻳﺎﻓﺘﻬﺎي ﻣﻄﻠﻮب ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ، اﻋﺘﺒﺎر‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ را اﻓﺰاﻳﺶ ﻣﻲدﻫﺪ و ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻊ آن ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﮕﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ، ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺛﺒﺎت ﻣﻔﻬﻮم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي‬
‫ﺳﻤﺒﻠﻴﻚ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻛﺎرﻛﺮدي اﺳﺖ. ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎرت دﻳﮕﺮ، ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻋﻘﻴﺪه دارﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ واﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ، داراي ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮي ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ آﻧﻬﺎ، در وﺟﻬﻪ و اﻋﺘﺒﺎر دﺳﺖ و ﭘﺎ ﺷﺪه‬
‫در ﺑﺎزار ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺳﻬﻴﻢ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ. ﻟﺬا ﻫﺮﭼﻪ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﺘﺮ‬
‫ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد:‬

‫٣٢ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫6‪ :H‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ درك ﺷﺪه از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪاي دارد.‬
‫7‪ :H‬ﻫﺮﭼﻪ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ درك ﺷﺪه از ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪاي ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﺘﺮ اﺳﺖ.‬
‫ﻓﺮﺿﻬﺎي ﺑﻌﺪي ﺑﻪ دﻧﺒﺎل ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي ﺑﺮ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ. اول اﻳﻨﻜﻪ، واﺿﺢ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ و ﺗﺪاﻋﻲﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﭘﺲ از ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﺑﺎﻗﻲ ﻣﻲ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﻧﺤﻮة‬
‫ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻲ را ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ. در ﺣﻴﻦ ﻛﺴﺐ آﮔﺎﻫﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ و ﻳﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﺷﺎي ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت، ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻋﻘﺎﻳﺪ و ﺗﻠﻘﻴﺎت‬
‫ﺧﻮد را از ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎري ﻛﻪ در ذﻫﻦ دارد ﻓﺮاﺧﻮاﻧﺪه و ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻬﺎ را ﺑﻪ روز ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮاﻳﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﻣﻌﻴﺎرﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺷﻜﻞ ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ داد، ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ اوﻟﻴﻪ، ﻗﺒﻞ از اﻋﻤﺎل ﻣﺤﺮك، ﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ داﺷﺖ.‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ اﻃﻼﻋﺎﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ در راﺳﺘﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻨﺘﻘﻞ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد ﺣﺴﺎس ﺑﻮده و در اﺛﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ، ﺗﻘﻮﻳﺖ و ﻳﺎ ﻛﻤﺮﻧﮓ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ. ﻗﺎﺑﻞ اﺳﺘﺪﻻل اﺳﺖ اﮔﺮ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻲ، ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ داﺷﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎن ﺻﻮرﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ دارد. ﻃﺒﻖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻫﺎي ﻗﺒﻠﻲ )ﻣﺎرﺗﻴﻨﺰ و ﭼﺮﻧﺎﺗﻮري، 4002( ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮ ﻋﻘﺎﻳﺪ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻲ‬
‫اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻﻲ آﻧﻬﺎ در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد. اﮔﺮﭼﻪ اﻟﻜﺴﺎﻧﺪر و ﻛﻠﮕﻴﺖ )5002( درﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎﻧﻲ ﻛﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ‬
‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ رﺿﺎﻳﺖ داﺷﺘﻨﺪ، رﺿﺎﻳﺖ آﻧﻬﺎ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﻮده ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪون ﺷﻚ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺛﺮ ﮔﺬاﺷﺘﻪ‬
‫اﺳﺖ:‬
‫8‪ :H‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻲ دارد.‬
‫9‪ :H‬ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻲ دارد.‬
‫ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﺎ اﻗﺪاﻣﺎت ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻛﻤﭙﻴﻦ ﻫﺎي‬
‫ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ دﻫﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﻠﻲ، اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﺷﺎﻧﺲ اﻗﺒﺎل ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را اﻓﺰاﻳﺶ ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ )ﻛﻴﻢ 3002،‬
‫ردي و ﻫﻤﻜﺎران 4991(. ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻧﻴﺎز ﺑﻪ اراﺋﺔ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت در ﻣﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ را ﻛﻪ واﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و‬
‫اﻫﺪاف آن اﺳﺖ آﺷﻜﺎر ﻛﺮده اﻧﺪ )ﺑﺮﻳﺠﺲ و ﻫﻤﻜﺎران 0002، ﭘﺮﻳﻮر و ﺑﺮادي 8991(. اﻳﻦ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ اﺛﺮ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ را ﺗﻌﺪﻳﻞ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻟﺬا ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ را ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎر ﻣﻲ ﺑﻨﺪﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﺎﻣﻞ،‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﻗﺒﻠﻲ و ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ.‬

‫٤٢ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮ.ﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ در راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ، ﺑﺮ اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﻴﻦ دﺳﺘﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬
‫اﻳﺠﺎد ﺷﺪه و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺛﺮﮔﺬار اﺳﺖ. از آﻧﺠﺎﻳﻴﻜﻪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت، ﺟﻨﺒﻪﻫﺎي ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻬﻤﺘﺮي ﺑﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ داﺷﺖ. اﻳﻦ ﺷﺮاﻳﻂ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ زﻣﺎﻧﻲ رخ ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت ﺑﺮ روي ﻧﺎم‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺘﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﺷﺪه ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ )ﺷﻴﻨﻴﻦ، 8991(. ﻓﺮﺿﻬﺎي زﻳﺮ از ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻗﺒﻠﻲ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺷﺪه اﻧﺪ:‬
‫‪ :H10a‬اﺛﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ وﻗﺘﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل را ﺑﺮاي ﺧﻮد‬
‫ﻣﺠﺴﻢ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ از زﻣﺎﻧﻲ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻛﺎر را ﻧﻤﻲﻛﻨﺪ.‬
‫‪ :H10b‬اﺛﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ وﻗﺘﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ دارﻧﺪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ از زﻣﺎﻧﻲ‬
‫اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ دارﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻣﺮور ادﺑﻴﺎت اﻧﺠﺎم ﺷﺪه و ﻓﺮﺿﻬﺎي ﻣﻄﺮح ﺷﺪه، ﻣﺪل زﻳﺮ اراﺋﻪ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد. ﻣﺪل از ﺳﻪ ﺑﺨﺶ اﺻﻠﻲ‬
‫ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﺷﺪه ﻛﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﮕﻲ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ. ﺑﺨﺶ اول در راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و اﺑﻌﺎد آن ﺑﺮ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺑﺨﺶ دوم اﺷﺎره ﺑﻪ اﺛﺮات‬
‫ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي دارد ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﭼﻄﻮر ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮي ﻛﻪ ﭘﺲ از ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ اﻳﺠﺎد ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ دارد. درﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ، ﻣﺪل ﺑﺮﺧﻲ اﺛﺮات ﺗﻌﺪﻳﻠﮕﺮ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﺑﺮ راﺑﻄﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ را ﻧﻴﺰ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد.‬

‫٥٢ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻃﺮح ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ و روش‬
‫ﻣﺘﺪﻟﻮژي ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ، آزﻣﻮن ﻓﺮﺿﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ اﻧﺠﺎم آن در ﻣﻮرد ﮔﺮوه ﻫﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ داﻧﺸﺠﻮﺑﺎن دورة ﻛﺎرﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ اﺳﺖ.‬
‫ﺟﻬﺖ آﻧﺎﻟﻴﺰ دادهﻫﺎي ﺟﻤﻊ آوري ﺷﺪه، از ﻣﺪﻟﺴﺎزي ﻣﻌﺎدﻻت ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎري )‪ (SEM‬اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺮﺧﻼف‬
‫روﺷﻬﺎي ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﻣﺜﻞ ‪ ،ANOVA‬ﻣﺘﺪﻟﻮژي ‪ SEM‬در ﻣﻮرد ﺧﻄﺎﻫﺎي ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ و ﻧﻴﺰ رواﺑﻂ ﭼﻨﺪﮔﺎﻧﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮد در ﻣﺪل، ﻗﺎﺑﻞ اﺗﻜﺎﺳﺖ و در ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ آزﻣﻮﻧﻬﺎي ﻗﻮي ﺗﺮي ﺑﺮاي ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻨﻬﺎ اراﺋﻪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼوه‬
‫ﻃﺒﻖ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻛﻼﻳﻦ )5002(، ‪ SEM‬روش ﻣﻔﻴﺪي ﺑﺮاي ﻛﺎر ﺑﺎ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻫﺎي ﻃﻮﻟﻲ اﺳﺖ. در اﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ، اﻳﻦ ﺷﺮاﻳﻂ در‬
‫زﻣﺎن اﻧﺪازهﮔﻴﺮي ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻗﺒﻞ و ﺑﻌﺪ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت اﺗﻔﺎق ﻣﻲ اﻓﺘﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻣﺸﺨﺺ، ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻳﻚ ﻃﺮح ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻲ 2×2×3 دارد:‬
‫3 ﻧﻮع ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻎ: ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺤﻮر، ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻣﺤﻮر، ﺑﺪون ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻎ‬
‫2 ﻧﻮع ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ 1، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ 2‬
‫2 ﻧﻮع ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ: ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﺎﻻ، ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ‬
‫٦٢ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻗﺒﻠﻲ، در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺳﺎﺧﺘﮕﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﺳﺎﺧﺘﮕﻲ و‬
‫اﻃﻼﻋﺎﺗﻲ در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ.‬
‫ﭘﻴﺶ آزﻣﻮﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻫﺪف از ﭘﻴﺶ آزﻣﻮن اول ﻛﻪ 16 ﻧﻔﺮ را در ﺑﺮ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ، ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻲ دو ﮔﺮوه ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻟﺒﻨﻲ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺗﺼﺎوﻳﺮ ﻛﺎﻣﻼً ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﺑﻮد. دﻟﻴﻞ اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺻﻨﻌﺖ ﻟﺒﻨﻴﺎت اﻳﻦ ﺑﻮد ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﺻﻨﻌﺖ ﺳﻬﻢ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻲ از ﺳﺒﺪ ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪ‬
‫ﻫﺎي ﺧﺎﻧﻮارﻫﺎ را ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ داده و ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﻌﺮوﻓﻲ در اﺳﭙﺎﻧﻴﺎ در اﻳﻦ ﺻﻨﻌﺖ وﺟﻮد دارﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺑﺮاي دﺳﺘﻴﺎﺑﻲ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ اﻧﺪازهﮔﻴﺮي دﻗﻴﻖ، ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﻣﻬﻤﻲ اﺳﺖ. ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ اﻓﺮادي ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﺳﻮژه اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺷﺪه اﻧﺪ ﺑﺨﺶ ﻣﻬﻤﻲ از‬
‫ﺑﺎزار ﻫﺪف اﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ. ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﺑﺮد و ﻫﻤﻜﺎران )0791(، ﺗﻌﺪاد اﻓﺮادي ﻛﻪ در ﻗﺒﺎل ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺼﻮر‬
‫ﻣﺜﺒﺘﻲ دارﻧﺪ، ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻤﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻌﺪاد ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻓﻌﻠﻲ آن دارد.‬
‫از اﻳﻦ رو، ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن در ﭘﻴﺶ آزﻣﻮن، در ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻣﻘﻴﺎس ﻫﺎي ﻫﻔﺖ ﺗﺎﻳﻲ ﻟﻴﻜﺮت، ﺷﺶ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻌﺮوف‬
‫ﺧﺮده ﻓﺮوﺷﻲ ﻟﺒﻨﻴﺎت را ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘﺎً دو ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ‪ Pascual‬و ‪ Celta‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﺴﻴﺎر ﻣﻌﺮوف ﺑﻮده وﻟﻲ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ آﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ را اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ.. ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ‪ Celta‬ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﺮ ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد وﻟﻲ ‪Pascual‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻﺗﻲ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻣﺎﺳﺖ، ﻣﻴﻠﻚ ﺷﻴﻚ، آﺑﻤﻴﻮه و ﺳﻴﺮﻳﻠﺰ را ﻧﻴﺰ در ﺑﺮ ﻣﻲ ﮔﻴﺮد.‬
‫در ﻳﻚ ﭘﻴﺶ آزﻣﻮن دﻳﮕﺮ، 74 داﻧﺸﺠﻮ، ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻫﺸﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ از ‪ Celta‬و ‪ Pascual‬را‬
‫ﺑﺮاي ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻲ دو دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻧﻤﻮدﻧﺪ. ﻳﻜﻲ از اﻳﻦ دو دﺳﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اﺻﻠﻲ ﻧﺰدﻳﻚ و ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺑﻮد و‬
‫دﺳﺘﺔ دﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻲ ارﺗﺒﺎط ﺗﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﻮد. ﻃﺒﻖ ﻧﻈﺮ آﻛﺮ و ﻛﻠﺮ )0991(، ﻫﺮ دو ﺷﻜﻞ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اول »ﺷﻜﻼت« ﺑﻮد ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ آن راي داده ﺷﺪ. دﺳﺘﺔ دﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫»ژل ﺣﻤﺎم« ﺑﻮد ﻛﻪ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎً ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ‪ Celta‬و ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ‪ Pascual‬ﻛﺎﻣﻼً ﺑﻴﮕﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻮد.‬
‫در ﭘﻴﺶ آزﻣﻮن دوم، ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻪ ﻫﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ، ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ و ﻧﻮع ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻫﺪف ‪ Pascual‬و ‪ Celta‬در‬
‫ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺳﻮاﻻت ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺤﻲ )ﺑﺎز( ﻣﻮرد ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت، ﺑﻌﺪاً ﺑﺮاي ﺳﺎﺧﺖ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻎ ﻣﻔﻴﺪ ﺑﻮد. آﻧﻬﺎ ﻫﺮ دو‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎظ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ )69% در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ 1/93%( و ﻟﺒﻨﻲ ﺑﻮدن آﻧﻬﺎ )8% در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ 4/71%( ﻣﻲ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻨﺪ. ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﻫﺪف دو ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﻛﻞ اﻋﻀﺎي ﺧﺎﻧﻮاده )02% در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ 4/71%( و اﻓﺮادي ﻛﻪ ﻧﮕﺮان ﺳﻼﻣﺘﻲ ﺧﻮد ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‬
‫)61% در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ 4/71%( ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻧﻤﻮدﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﻃﺮح و روﻳﺔ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ‬
‫٧٢ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻳﻚ ﻧﻤﻤﻮﻧﺔ 995ﺗﺎﻳﻲ از داﻧﺸﺠﻮﻳﺎن ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ 21 ﮔﺮوه ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺷﺪه ﺑﻮدﻧﺪ در آزﻣﺎﻳﺶ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر‬
‫ﺗﺼﺎدﻓﻲ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﺣﺎوي ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﻧﻮﻋﻲ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻎ ﺑﻴﻦ آﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻮزﻳﻊ ﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﺟﺪول 1 اﻧﺪازة ﮔﺮوه ﻫﺎي آزﻣﻮن‬

‫ﺑﺨﺶ اول ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﺑﺮاي ﻫﻤﻪ ﻳﻜﺴﺎن ﺑﻮد و ﺣﺎوي ﺳﻮﻻﺗﻲ در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ و وﻓﺎداري‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻮد. ﻗﺴﻤﺖ دوم، اﻓﺮاد را از ﻋﺮﺿﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ‪ X‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزار آﮔﺎه ﻣﻲ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ و در ﺻﻮرت ﻟﺰوم از ﻳﻚ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻎ ﭼﺎﭘﻲ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮاي اﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﻈﻮر اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻣﻲ ﻛﺮد. در اﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ، ﭘﺎﺳﺦ دﻫﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ آن، اﻋﺘﺒﺎر ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻎ را ﻧﻴﺰ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﻲ ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ. ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ آزﻣﻮن ﻓﺮضﻫﺎ در راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ رد ﻳﺎ ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﺷﺪن آﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫در ﺟﺪول 2 آﻣﺪه اﺳﺖ:‬
‫ﺟﺪول 2 ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ‬

‫٨٢ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻻزم ﺑﻪ ذﻛﺮ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ دﻫﻨﺪﮔﺎن، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را ﺑﺎ ﺳﻮاﻻﺗﻲ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ‬
‫اﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را در ذﻫﻦ ﺧﻮد ﻣﺘﺼﻮر ﻣﻲ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ.‬

‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪﮔﻴﺮي ﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ داراي ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺘﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ اﻳﻦ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ را دارﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺧﻮد را ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪ )ﺑﺎﻻﭼﻨﺪر و ﮔﺎوز، 3002(. ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﻲ از داراﻳﻴﻬﺎي ﻛﻠﻴﺪي ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺷﺪه، ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن و‬
‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺪﻳﺮان ﺳﺎزﻣﺎﻧﻬﺎ ﻋﻼﻗﻤﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮاﮔﻴﺮي روﺷﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را در ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﮔﺴﺘﺮش داده‬
‫و اﺣﺘﻤﺎل ﻛﻤﺮﻧﮓ ﺷﺪن ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺣﺪاﻗﻞ ﺳﺎزﻧﺪ.‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻜﺎرﮔﻴﺮي ﻳﻚ ﻣﺪل ﻧﻈﺮي ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ آﺛﺎر ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ.‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﺎ در ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻳﻚ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺗﻌﺪﻳﻠﮕﺮ، ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ اﺑﺘﻜﺎري و ﻧﻮﻳﻨﻲ را اراﺋﻪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻛﺎرﮔﻴﺮي آﻧﻬﺎ در اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي اﻳﻨﭽﻨﻴﻨﻲ ﻣﻔﻴﺪ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد و ﺑﻪ ﻣﺪﻳﺮان ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﻛﺪاﻣﻴﻚ از‬
‫اﺑﺰارﻫﺎي ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ را ﺑﺮ رﻓﺘﺎر ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ.‬

‫٩٢ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻣﺪل، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﺮاي ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﺪﻧﻈﺮ ﻗﺮار ﻣﻲ ﮔﻴﺮد اﮔﺮﭼﻪ اﻳﻦ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ‬
‫ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﻋﻘﺎﻳﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﮔﺮدد. ﻣﻬﻤﺘﺮ از ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ و ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ درك ﺷﺪه ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ دارد. ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺒﻲ ﻛﻪ در‬
‫ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺸﻬﻮرﺗﺮ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ اﺳﺖ.‬
‫ﻓﺮض راﻳﺞ در ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﻗﺒﻠﻲ اﻳﻦ ﺑﻮده ﻛﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ دارد. ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﺣﺎل،‬
‫ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ، ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ اﺑﻌﺎد ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‬
‫ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد. ﺟﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ »ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« اﺛﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺑﺮ وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ دارد، ﻧﻪ »ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ« و‬
‫ﻧﻪ »وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« ﺑﺮ اﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ دارﻧﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ از آﻧﺠﺎ ﺑﻪ دﺳﺖ آﻣﺪه ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﻗﺒﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻧﻜﺮدهاﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻋﻮاﻣﻞ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻛﻨﻨﺪة ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﻳﻚ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ در رواﺑﻂ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎري دﻳﮕﺮ، ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻫﺎي واﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ اﺛﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻤﻲ وﺟﻮد ﻧﺪارد، اﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ از ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ، ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻏﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻴﺰان ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ارﺗﺒﺎط اﺳﺖ. ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ، ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع اﺛﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮ وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد. در ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ، دادهﻫﺎ ﻧﺘﻮاﻧﺴﺘﻨﺪ وﺟﻮد راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و‬
‫ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ را ﻧﺸﺎن دﻫﻨﺪ. از اﻳﻨﺮو، ﻋﻘﺎﻳﺪ ﻛﻠﻲ در ﻣﻮرد ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ و ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮد ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺑﺪون ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از دﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺷﺮﻛﺖ، ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ را ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻣﺪل، اﻳﻦ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ و ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ اوﻟﻴﻪاي ﻛﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ وﺟﻮد دارد، ﻋﻮاﻣﻞ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﻛﻨﻨﺪة ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ،‬
‫ﭘﺲ از اراﺋﺔ اﻃﻼﻋﺎت و ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ اﺛﺮات ﺗﻌﺪﻳﻠﮕﺮ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ زﻣﺎﻧﻴﻜﻪ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮة ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت دﺳﺘﺮﺳﻲ‬
‫داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻗﻮﻳﺘﺮي ﺑﺮ ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد. اﻳﻦ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺑﺮاي ﻫﺮ دو ﻧﻮع ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻎ‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ وﻳﮋﮔﻴﻬﺎي ﺧﻮد ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺗﺎﻛﻴﺪ دارﻧﺪ و ﻳﺎ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲ ﭘﺮدازﻧﺪ،‬
‫ﻳﻜﺴﺎن اﺳﺖ. ﻣﺎداﻣﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﺑﺮ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﮕﻲ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﻛﻴﺪ دارد، ﻋﻘﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه را ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﮔﺴﺘﺮده ﺗﺮي‬
‫ﭘﻮﺷﺶ ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ. ﻟﺬا ﻫﺪف از ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت، ﭼﻴﺰي ﻓﺮاﺗﺮ از ﺗﺤﻘﻖ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺗﺜﺒﻴﺖ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﻫﺮﺟﺎ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت، ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻳﺎ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ، ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﻣﻨﻌﻜﺲ ﺳﺎزد، ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻗﺎدر ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ ﺑﻮد ﺑﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺮﻗﺮار ﻛﺮده و ﺷﻤﺎي ﻛﻠﻲ آﻧﻬﺎ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﭼﺸﻤﮕﻴﺮي ﻧﺨﻮاﻫﺪ ﻛﺮد.‬

‫٠٣ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ ‬

‫در ﻓﻀﺎي ﻛﺴﺐ و ﻛﺎر، از ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺑﻪ دﺳﺖ آﻣﺪه در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﻬﺮه ﻫﺎي ﺑﺴﻴﺎري ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮان ﺑﺮد. ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻗﺼﺪ اراﺋﻪ و ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ( دارﻧﺪ، ﺑﺮاي ﺣﺪاﻗﻞ ﺳﺎزي رﻳﺴﻚ ﻛﻤﺮﻧﮓ ﺷﺪن ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﻣﺠﺒﻮر‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮداﺷﺘﻬﺎي ﻓﻌﻠﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ دﻫﻨﺪ. ﺟﺪاي از دﺳﺘﻪ اي ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﻪ آن‬
‫ﺗﻌﻠﻖ دارد، ﻻزم اﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﻣﺰﻳﺘﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را از ﺑﺎزاري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزار دﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻨﺘﻘﻞ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. وﻗﺘﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪي ﻣﺸﻬﻮر ﺑﻮده و ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﻲ دارد، ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد ﺗﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻛﻤﭙﻴﻦ ﻫﺎي ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه‬
‫ﻳﺎدآوري ﺷﻮد.. ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮاﻳﻦ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ، ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻗﻮﻳﺘﺮي ﺑﺮ وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ( و ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد. ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎرت دﻳﮕﺮ، اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺷﺪﻳﺪاً ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻧﺪاﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‬
‫دﻟﻴﻠﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﻋﺪم ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ از آﮔﺎﻫﻲ و ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد.‬
‫در ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﺑﻌﺪي ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮان ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ اﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ را ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ واﻗﻌﻲ ﺗﺴﺖ ﻛﺮد.‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺻﺤﺖ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ را ﺑﺎ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻏﻴﺮ داﻧﺸﺠﻮ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﺴﺖ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ، ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺑﻌﺪي ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻮاﻣﻞ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﻨﺪة وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ، ﺑﺎ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ از داﻧﺸﺠﻮ ﺑﻪ ﻏﻴﺮ داﻧﺸﺠﻮ، دﺳﺘﺨﻮش ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻲ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ.‬

‫١٣ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ‬

‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻔﻲ:‬

‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬

‫ﭼﻜﻴﺪه‬
‫ﭼﺮا ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻛﺎﻻﻫﺎ و ﺧﺪﻣﺎت ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺑﻪ دﻧﺒﺎل اﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮاي ﺧﻮد ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﻳﺠﺎد ﻛﺮده و‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺧﻮد را ﺗﺤﺖ آن ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ در ﺣﺎﻟﻴﻜﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﭘﺮوﺳﻪاي ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪﻫﺎي زﻳﺎدي از ﻗﺒﻴﻞ ﺑﺴﺘﻪﺑﻨﺪي،‬
‫ﺑﺮﭼﺴﺐﮔﺬاري، ﻣﺠﻮزﻫﺎ و ﺛﺒﺖﻫﺎي ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻲ، ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت، ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ و... را ﺑﺮاي آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ دﻧﺒﺎل دارد؟ در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﺎن رﻳﺴﻚ‬
‫ﻋﺪم اﻗﺒﺎل ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻮرد ﻧﻈﺮ از ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺑﺎزار و ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن را ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﻧﺎدﻳﺪه ﮔﺮﻓﺖ. ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻲرﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ اﺗﺨﺎذ‬
‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ راﻫﺒﺮدي، ﻛﻪ در اﺻﻄﻼح ﺑﻪ آن ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﻮد، ﻣﺰاﻳﺎﻳﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﺻﺎﺣﺒﺎن ﻛﺴﺐوﻛﺎر داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. در‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ، ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﻣﺮاﺣﻞ آن ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺒﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه ﻣﺜﺎلﻫﺎﻳﻲ از ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎي اﻳﺮاﻧﻲ و ﺧﺎرﺟﻲ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﺷﺪه و‬
‫در اداﻣﻪ، ﻳﻜﻲ از ﻣﺮاﺣﻞ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ »ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« ﺑﺎ ﺟﺰﻳﻴﺎت ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮي ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻛﻪ در اﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ از ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪﻫﺎ و ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ دو ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﺷﺪه در راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﻳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻬﺮه ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ.‬

‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ‬
‫در ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮﺗﮋي ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت، ﻳﻜﻲ از ﻣﻮاردي ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ آن ﻣﻮاﺟﻪ ﺧﻮاﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﻮد ﺑﺤﺚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ‬
‫ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ از ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ ﻣﻬﻢ و اﺻﻠﻲ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﻣﺪﻳﺮﻳﺖ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﻪ ﺷﻤﺎر ﻣﻲ رود. ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل‬
‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﻳﻚ ﻧﺎم ﺗﺠﺎري، ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰم ﻳﻚ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﮔﺬاري ﻧﺴﺒﺘﺎً ﺑﺎﻻ و ﺑﻠﻨﺪﻣﺪت اﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮري ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن‬
‫ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﺮده و وﻇﻴﻔﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ را ﺑﻪ دﻳﮕﺮان ﻣﺤﻮل ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. در واﻗﻊ ﻛﺎري ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن‬
‫ﺗﺎﻳﻮاﻧﻲ در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت از ﻗﺒﻴﻞ ﭘﻮﺷﺎك، ﻛﺎﻣﭙﻴﻮﺗﺮ و ﻟﻮازم ﺧﺎﻧﮕﻲ اﻟﻜﺘﺮوﻧﻴﻚ اﻧﺠﺎم ﻣﻲدﻫﻨﺪ. ﻋﻤﺪة‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﮔﺬاري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺤﺜﻬﺎي ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت، ﭘﻴﺸﺒﺮد و ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻨﺪي ﻣﻌﻄﻮف ﻣﻲﮔﺮدد.‬
‫اﻣﺎ در ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن در ﻣﻲ ﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪرت ﺑﺎزار در دﺳﺖ ﺻﺎﺣﺒﺎن ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎﺳﺖ. ﺻﺎﺣﺒﺎن ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ ﻣﻲ-‬
‫ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ راﺣﺘﻲ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﻨﺪة ﺧﻮد را ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ داده و ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎي ﻛﺎرﺧﺎﻧﺠﺎت ﺗﺎﻳﻮاﻧﻲ، از ﻛﺎرﺧﺎﻧﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﻲ در ﻣﺎﻟﺰي و ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺟﺎﻫﺎي ارزان ﺗﺮ دﻳﮕﺮ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﺜﺎل ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎي ژاﭘﻨﻲ و ﻛﺮه ﺟﻨﻮﺑﻲ، ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر وﺳﻴﻌﻲ در ﺣﻮزة‬
‫٣٣ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺳﺎﺧﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺧﻮد ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﮔﺬاري ﻛﺮده و ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه اي از ﻗﺒﻴﻞ ‪،Toyota ،Sony‬‬
‫‪ Samsung ،Goldstar‬و... را اﻳﺠﺎد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﺣﺘﻲ زﻣﺎﻧﻲ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ دﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﺘﻮاﻧﻨﺪ از ﭘﺲ ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪ ﻫﺎي‬
‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ در ﻛﺸﻮر ﺧﻮد ﺑﺮآﻳﻨﺪ، اﻳﻦ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺗﺠﺎري ارزﺷﻤﻨﺪ ﻛﻤﺎﻛﺎن ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﻨﺪة رﻓﺘﺎر و ﺗﻘﺎﺿﺎي ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه‬
‫ﺑﻮده و ﻛﺎري ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻫﻤﻮاره ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﺧﻮد را داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻗﻮي اﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎً از ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه داراي ﺿﻤﺎﻧﺖ اﺳﺖ. ﻳﻌﻨﻲ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﻪاي‬
‫رﺳﻴﺪه ﻛﻪ ﺗﻌﺪاد زﻳﺎدي از ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﻣﺘﻘﺎﺿﻲ آن ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺰﻳﻦ را ﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﺎ ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎد ﻗﻴﻤﺖ‬
‫ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ ﺗﺮ، رد ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ. در ﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺣﺎل ﺣﺎﺿﺮ دﻧﻴﺎ، ‪ Maytag ،Mercedes‬و ‪ IBM‬ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻲ دارﻧﺪ‬
‫وﻟﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺜﻞ ‪ General Electric ،Chevy‬و ‪ Radio Shack‬ﻫﻨﻮز ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﻪ ﻧﺮﺳﻴﺪهاﻧﺪ. ﻣﻼﺣﻈﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻲﺷﻮد ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ‪ GE‬ﺑﺎ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎظ ﺷﻬﺮت ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي دﻳﮕﺮ وﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻣﻄﻠﻮب ﺗﺮي دارد وﻟﻲ‬
‫ﻫﻨﻮز ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﻲ ﻧﺮﺳﻴﺪه ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ‪ ،Mercedes‬ﻧﺎﻣﺶ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﻗﺒﻞ از ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ وﺟﻮه ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ، در اﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺳﻮاﻟﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻄﺮح اﺳﺖ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ اﺻﻮﻻً ﭼﺮا ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺑﻪ دﻧﺒﺎل ﻓﺮاﻳﻨﺪ ﺑﻌﻀﺎً ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ. دﻟﻴﻞ اول و اﺣﺘﻤﺎﻻً اﺻﻠﻲ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ در دﻧﻴﺎي اﻣﺮوز ﻛﻪ وﻳﮋﮔﻲ‬
‫اﺻﻠﻲ آن رﻗﺎﺑﺖ ﺷﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ و ﭘﺎﺳﺨﮕﻮﻳﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻴﺎزﻫﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ،‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﻧﺎم آن ﺑﻮده و ﻛﻠﻴﺔ ﻛﺎرﻛﺮدﻫﺎي ﻳﻚ »ﻧﺎم« را ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮان ﺑﺮاي آن ﻣﺘﺼﻮر ﺑﻮد. وﻗﺘﻲ‬
‫ﻛﻮدﻛﻲ ﺑﻪ دﻧﻴﺎ ﻣﻲ آﻳﺪ، اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﻧﺎم ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﺮاي وي ﻳﻜﻲ از ﻣﻬﻤﺘﺮﻳﻦ و ﺣﺘﻲ ﺳﺨﺖ ﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻤﺎﺗﻲ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫واﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﻛﻮدك ﺑﺎﻳﺪ اﺗﺨﺎذ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪ. در دﻧﻴﺎي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت و ﺧﺪﻣﺎت ﻧﻴﺰ، وﻇﻴﻔﺔ ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﻴﺰان ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﺎن را‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﻣﻲ ﻛﺸﺪ. ﻣﺘﺨﺼﺼﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ اﻳﻦ واﻗﻌﻴﺖ را ﺑﻪ رﺳﻤﻴﺖ ﻣﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﻜﻲ از ﻓﺎﻛﺘﻮرﻫﺎي‬
‫ﻛﻠﻴﺪي ارزش آﻓﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ روي ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ آوردن ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ‬
‫ﮔﺬاﺷﺘﻪ و ﺣﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻌﻨﻲ ﺑﻮده و ﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﺮ وﺟﻬﻪ و ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮﮔﺬار ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. اﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻧﺎم‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﺗﻨﻮع آن در ادﺑﻴﺎت ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ ﺧﻴﻠﻲ ﺗﺎزﮔﻲ ﻧﺪارد. از ﺟﻤﻠﺔ ﻛﺎرﻛﺮدﻫﺎي ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻛﺎرا، ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮد ﻧﻤﻮدن‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل و اﻳﺠﺎد اﻣﻜﺎن رﻫﮕﻴﺮي ﺳﻔﺎرﺷﺎت ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ آن ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. دﻟﻴﻞ دوم ﻓﺮاﻫﻢ آﻣﺪن ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻲ‬
‫از اﻧﺤﺼﺎر وﻳﮋﮔﻴﻬﺎي ﺧﺎص ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ در ﺻﻮرت ﻋﺪم ﺛﺒﺖ ﻧﺎم ﺗﺠﺎري و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اﻣﻜﺎن‬
‫ﻛﭙﻲﺑﺮداري و ﺳﻮءاﺳﺘﻔﺎده از آن ﻓﺮاﻫﻢ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ آﻣﺪ.‬
‫ﺳﻮم اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ اﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺻﺖ را ﺑﺮاي ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻓﺮاﻫﻢ ﻣﻲآورد ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮاي ﺧﻮد ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎﻧﻲ وﻓﺎدار و ﺳﻮدآور‬
‫ﻛﺴﺐ ﻛﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ وﻓﺎداري در ﻓﻀﺎي رﻗﺎﺑﺘﻲ ﺑﺎزار، ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﻤﻚ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﻛﺮد و در ﻃﺮاﺣﻲ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ آﻣﻴﺰة‬
‫٤٣ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ1 و اﺗﺨﺎذ راﻫﺒﺮدﻫﺎي ﻣﺘﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺮﻳﻚ، دﺳﺖ ﻣﺪﻳﺮان ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ را ﺑﺎز ﻣﻲﮔﺬارد. دﻟﻴﻞ ﭼﻬﺎرم ﺑﻪ ﺑﺤﺚ‬
‫ﺑﺨﺶ ﺑﻨﺪي ﺑﺎزار2 ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد. ﻳﻚ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﺪ اﻧﻮاع ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺧﻮد را ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺗﺠﺎري‬
‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ و ﻣﺘﻨﻮع در ﺑﺨﺶ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻲ ﺷﺪه ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺎزار ﺧﻮد ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ. ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ ﺧﺎرﺟﻲ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻛﻪ‬
‫در اﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﺘﻮن و ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻬﺎي ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺣﺪاﻗﻞ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎر ﻧﺎم آن ﺑﺮده ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد، ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ‪ P&G‬ﻳﺎ ‪Procter & Gamble‬‬
‫ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ در ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ و ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺧﻮد از راﻫﺒﺮد ‪ Corporate branding‬اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻧﻜﺮده و ﻫﺮﻛﺪام‬
‫از ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺧﻮد را ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزار ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ.‬
‫از ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎي داﺧﻠﻲ اﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻲﺗﻮان ﺷﺮﻛﺖ »ﭘﺎرس ﻣﻴﻨﻮ« را ﻣﺜﺎل زد ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ در ﺣﻮزة ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت‬
‫ﻏﺬاﻳﻲ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺷﻜﻼت، ﺑﻴﺴﻜﻮﻳﺖ، وﻳﻔﺮ، اﺳﻨﻚ، ﭼﻮبﺷﻮر، آداﻣﺲ، ﺗﺎﻓﻲ، آﺑﻨﺒﺎت و... ﻣﺸﻬﻮر اﺳﺖ اﻣﺎ در ﭼﻨﺪ ﺳﺎل‬
‫اﺧﻴﺮ در ﺣﻮزة ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت آراﻳﺸﻲ و ﺑﻬﺪاﺷﺘﻲ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻟﻴﺴﺎﻧﺲ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪهﻫﺎي ﻣﻌﺘﺒﺮ اروﭘﺎﻳﻲ ﻧﻴﺰ وارد ﺷﺪه‬
‫اﺳﺖ. ﮔﺮوه ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻲ ﻣﻴﻨﻮ در ﺑﺨﺶ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻏﺬاﻳﻲ، ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ‪ ،P&G‬ﺑﺮاي ﻫﺮﻳﻚ از ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺧﻮد ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺰﻳﺪه و اﻗﺪام ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ و ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺪن اﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ ﻧﻤﻮده اﺳﺖ و ﺑﻪ ﺳﺒﺐ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎر ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﺎً دوﻟﺘﻲ ﺧﻮد، در‬
‫ﺣﻮزة ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﻣﺸﻜﻼت ﻛﻤﺘﺮي ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎظ ﺑﻮدﺟﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ رﻗﺒﺎي ﺑﺨﺶ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻲ ﺧﻮد داﺷﺘﻪ و ﺗﻮاﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺧﻮد را ﺑﻪ ﺣﺪي در ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺟﺎ ﺑﻴﻨﺪازد ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺑﻘﻴﺔ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن را ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪي ﻛﻪ ﻣﻴﻨﻮ ﺑﺮاي آن ﺑﺮﮔﺰﻳﺪه ﺑﺸﻨﺎﺳﻨﺪ )ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ »اﺳﻨﻚ« ﭘﻔﻚ ﻧﻤﻜﻲ و ﻳﺎ »ﺑﻴﺴﻜﻮﻳﺖ داﻳﺠﺴﺘﻴﻮ« ﺳﺎﻗﻪ‬
‫ﻃﻼﻳﻲ(.‬
‫ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘﺎً اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﻮﻓﻖ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮي ﻣﻄﻠﻮب از ﺷﺮﻛﺖ در ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺸﺘﺮي اﻳﺠﺎد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل‬
‫در ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻎ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎت ﻛﻴﻔﻲ و ﻧﻴﺰ اﻧﺪازة ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﺑﺴﺰاﻳﻲ دارد.‬

‫ﺧﺎﻧﻮادة ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ‬
‫در ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻤﺎت ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل در ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ، روﻧﺪ ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ ﺳﺎزي ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ ﺻﻮرت اﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻛﻪ اﺑﺘﺪا در ﻣﻮرد ﺧﻮد ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ وﺟﻮدي آن ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ ﮔﻴﺮي ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد. ﭘﺲ از اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﻳﻚ ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، در‬
‫ﻣﻮرد ﭼﮕﻮﻧﮕﻲ ﺳﺎزﻣﺎﻧﺪﻫﻲ و ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ آن اﺗﺨﺎذ ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد ﻛﻪ درواﻗﻊ اﺳﭙﺎﻧﺴﺮ و ﺣﺎﻣﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در اﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ. در ﮔﺎم ﺑﻌﺪي در ﺧﺼﻮص ﻧﺤﻮة ﺗﺨﺼﻴﺺ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ و اﺗﺨﺎذ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ در اﻳﻦ ﺧﺼﻮص ﺑﺤﺚ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد. ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻧﻈﺮ ﻛﺎﺗﻠﺮ اﺻﻮﻻً ﭼﻬﺎر ﻧﻮع اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي در اﻳﻦ راﺑﻄﻪ وﺟﻮد دارد:‬
‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫)‪ Marketing mix (٤Ps‬‬
‫‪ Market segmentation‬‬

‫٢‬

‫٥٣ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫1. ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﻨﻔﺮد1: ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﮔﺮوه »ﮔﻠﺮﻧﮓ« ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ )ﮔﻠﺮﻧﮓ، اوه، ﺳﺎﻓﺘﻠﻦ، اﻛﺘﻴﻮ،‬
‫اوﻳﻼ و...(‬
‫2. ﻳﻚ ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮاي ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت2: ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺷﺮﻛﺖ »ﻣﻴﻬﻦ« ﺑﺮاي اﻧﻮاع ﺑﺴﺘﻨﻲ و در ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎي‬
‫ﺧﺎرﺟﻲ، ﺷﻜﻼت ﻫﺮﺷﻲ.‬
‫3. ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺟﺪا ﺑﺮاي ﺧﺎﻧﻮاده ﻫﺎي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ3: ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻛﺎرﺧﺎﻧﺔ »ﺻﻨﺎﻳﻊ ﻏﺬاﻳﻲ ﺑﻬﺮوز« ﺑﺮاي‬
‫ﻋﺮﺿﺔ ﺳﺲ ﻣﺎﻳﻮﻧﺰ ﺑﻬﺮوز، ﻣﺮﺑﺎي ﺑﻬﺮوز، رب ﮔﻮﺟﻪ ﻓﺮﻧﮕﻲ ﺑﻬﺮوز و... و ﻳﺎ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﺪﺑﺎﻧﻮ ﺑﺮاي‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻏﺬاﻳﻲ ﺧﻮد ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ »دﻟﭙﺬﻳﺮ« ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد.‬
‫4. ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻧﺎم ﻛﻤﭙﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎم ﻣﺤﺼﻮل4: در اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻲ، ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﺮاي ﻫﺮ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺧﻮد ﻳﻚ ﻧﺎم‬
‫اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﻛﺮده و آن را ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه ﻧﺎم ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎر ﻣﻲ ﺑﺮد. ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ‪.Kellogg’s Rice Krispies‬‬
‫ﮔﺎم ﺑﻌﺪي ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ ﮔﻴﺮي راﺟﻊ ﺑﻪ اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ آن‬
‫»ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد.‬

‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي »ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ5« ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺗﻼﺷﻲ در ﺟﻬﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﻳﻚ ﻧﺎم ﺗﺠﺎري ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﺑﺮاي ﻋﺮﺿﺔ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﻳﺎ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ در ﺑﺎزار اﺗﻼق ﻣﻲﮔﺮدد. ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ‪ Quaker Oats‬ﭘﺲ از ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﭼﺸﻤﮕﻴﺮ ﺻﺒﺤﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎي‬
‫‪ ،Cap’n Crunch‬از اﻳﻦ ﻧﺎم ﺗﺠﺎري و ﻟﻮﮔﻮي آن در ﻋﺮﺿﺔ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت دﻳﮕﺮ از ﻗﺒﻴﻞ ﺑﺴﺘﻨﻲ، ﺗﻲ-ﺷﺮت‬
‫و... اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﺮد. ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ‪ Armour‬از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ‪ Dial‬ﺑﺮاي اراﺋﺔ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺧﻮد ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻮع آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺴﻴﺎر زﻳﺎد‬
‫ﻫﻢ ﺑﻮدﻧﺪ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﺮد و ﻃﺒﻖ ادﻋﺎي ﻣﺪﻳﺮان ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ و ﻓﺮوش اﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ، ﺳﻬﻢ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻲ از ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﺻﺮﻓﻪﺟﻮﻳﻲﻫﺎي ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪ ﻫﺎي ﺗﻮزﻳﻊ آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ واﺳﻄﺔ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﺑﻮدن ‪ Dial‬ﺑﻮده‬
‫اﺳﺖ. ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺧﻮدروﺳﺎزي ‪ Honda‬از اﻳﻦ ﻧﺎم ﺗﺠﺎري در ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ و ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻬﺎي ﭼﻤﻦ زﻧﻲ ﺧﻮد ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﺑﻬﺮه ﺟﺴﺖ. رواﻧﻪ ﻛﺮدن ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزار، ﻳﻚ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺖ ﺗﺠﺎري ﭘﺮ رﻳﺴﻚ و ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪﺑﺮ اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺎ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻧﺮخ‬
‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫ ‪ Individual brand names‬‬
‫ ‪ A blanket family name for all products‬‬
‫٣‬
‫ ‪ Separate family names for all products‬‬
‫٤‬
‫‪ Company trade name combined with individual product names‬‬
‫٥‬
‫ ‪ Brand extension‬‬
‫٢‬

‫٦٣ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ اﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻻً ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦﺗﺮ از 05% اﺳﺖ، ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ اﻏﻠﺐ ﺑﻪ دﻧﺒﺎل اﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎرﮔﻴﺮي‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺧﻮد را ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮرت ﻫﺮﭼﻪ ﺟﺬابﺗﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن و ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻮزﻳﻊ‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اراﺋﻪ دﻫﻨﺪ.‬
‫اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻣﺰاﻳﺎي ﺑﺴﻴﺎري دارد. ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻗﻮي ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﺪ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ اﻗﺒﺎل اﻳﺠﺎد ﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫و در اﻳﻦ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت و ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺪن ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ، ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎظ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﺑﻮدن‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺻﺮﻓﻪﺟﻮﻳﻲ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ. ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ ﺗﻘﺎﺿﺎ، ارزش اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ،‬
‫ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد ﺗﺎ از ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪﻫﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ و ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺟﺘﻨﺎب ﮔﺮدد. اﻳﻦ ﻣﺰﻳﺖ و ﺑﺴﻴﺎري ﻣﺰاﻳﺎي دﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺷﺪهاﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﻜﻲ از راﻳﺞ ﺗﺮﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎ در ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺪﻳﺮان ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫اﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﻣﺰاﻳﺎي ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻲ در اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻫﺎي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ وﺟﻮد دارد، ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﺣﺎل اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي از رﻳﺴﻚ‬
‫ﺗﺨﺮﻳﺐ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ﻧﺰد ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﺑﺮﺧﻮردار اﺳﺖ. ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﻧﺎدرﺳﺖ و ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﺪ ارزش وﻳﮋه ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺷﻤﺎ را ﺑﻪ ﻛﻠﻲ ﻛﺎﻫﺶ دﻫﺪ. اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮاي ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪن آن ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﮔﺬاري و ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪﻫﺎي‬
‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎري ﻣﺘﻮﺟﻪ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺷﺪه، ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻟﻲ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ ﻣﺪﻳﺮﻳﺖ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل در ﻣﻮرد آن ﺑﻪ درﺳﺘﻲ اﻧﺠﺎم‬
‫ﻧﺸﺪه و اﺳﺘﺎﻧﺪاردﻫﺎي ﻻزم در ﻣﻮرد رﺻﺪ ﻧﻴﺎزﻫﺎي ﻣﺸﺘﺮي و اﻳﺪهﭘﺮدازي درﺳﺖ ﺑﺮاي ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻﺗﻲ ﺟﻬﺖ‬
‫رﻓﻊ اﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺎزﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺑﻲ ﺻﻮرت ﻧﮕﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘﺎً اﻳﻦ اﺗﻔﺎﻗﺎت ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻋﺪم اﻗﺒﺎل ﻣﺤﺼﻮل از ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ،‬
‫ﺑﺎﻋﺚ دﻟﺴﺮدي ﻣﺸﺘﺮي از ﺧﻮد ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﺗﺨﺮﻳﺐ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺰ اﻳﺠﺎد ﺷﺪه از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ذﻫﻦ وي ﺷﺪه و ﺑﻪ وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﻘﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﺎن ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺿﺮﺑﻪ وارد ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻓﺮض اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻲ ﻧﻘﺺ و ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﻮده، اﮔﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪي ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد ﻣﺘﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﺎ ﻛﺎرﻛﺮد آن ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ ﺑﺎز ﻫﻢ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﻛﺸﻴﺪه‬
‫ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد. ﻣﺜﻼً آﻳﺎ ﺷﻤﺎ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻴﺪ رب ﻛﻮﺟﻪ ﻓﺮﻧﮕﻲ »اﻳﺮاﻧﻮل« و ﻳﺎ ﻟﻮازم اﻟﻜﺘﺮوﻧﻴﻜﻲ »دﻟﭙﺬﻳﺮ« را ﺗﺼﻮر ﻛﻨﻴﺪ؟‬
‫ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ اﻳﻨﻬﺎ، اﺳﺘﻔﺎدة ﺑﻴﺶ از ﺣﺪ از ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﺪ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ از ﺑﻴﻦ رﻓﺘﻦ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎه وﻳﮋهاش ﺷﻮد. راﻳﺰ‬
‫و ﺗﺮوت )1891( اﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ را ﺗﻠﺔ »ﺗﻮﺳﺔ ﺧﻄﻲ« ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪهاﻧﺪ ]2[. وﻗﺘﻲ ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻲ در اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮاي‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و اﺗﺨﺎذ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺗﻠﻪاي ﮔﺮﻓﺘﺎر ﺷﻮد و ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻣﺘﻨﻮع ﺧﻮد را‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ، ﻣﻌﻨﺎ و ﻣﻔﻬﻮم ﺧﻮد را از دﺳﺖ داده و ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻﺗﻲ ﻫﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ اﻳﻦ ﻧﺎم ﻋﺮﺿﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺗﺪاﻋﻲ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﭼﻨﺪﮔﺎﻧﻪ در ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن، ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ ﺧﻮد را در ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت رﻗﺒﺎ‬
‫از دﺳﺖ ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ.‬
‫٧٣ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ »ﭼﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪي1«‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي دﻳﮕﺮي ﻛﻪ در ﺧﺼﻮص ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت وﺟﻮد دارد، ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﺎً در ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﻗﺮار ﻣﻲ ﮔﻴﺮد و آن اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﭼﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ﻳﻚ دﺳﺘﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪي ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﻣﺸﻬﻮرﺗﺮﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از‬
‫اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ‪ P&G‬ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ در ﺣﻮزة ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻮاد ﺷﻮﻳﻨﺪه ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎن ﺑﺎ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ‪ Tide‬در‬
‫ﺑﺎزار، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ‪ Cheer‬را ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان رﻗﻴﺐ آن رواﻧﺔ ﺑﺎزار ﻧﻤﻮد. اﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ، ﻓﺮوش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ‪ Tide‬ﻛﺎﻫﺶ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺳﻲ ﻧﺸﺎن داد وﻟﻲ ﻓﺮوش ﻫﺮ دو ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ، روﻧﺪ اﻓﺰاﻳﺸﻲ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲ داد. در ﺣﺎل ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ‬
‫ﭘﺮوﻛﺘﺮاﻧﺪﮔﻤﺒﻞ در ﺣﻮزة ﻣﻮاد ﺷﻮﻳﻨﺪه ﺑﺎﻟﻎ ﺑﺮ ﻫﺸﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزار اراﺋﻪ ﻛﺮده و آﻧﻬﺎ را ﻣﺪﻳﺮﻳﺖ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ.‬
‫دﻻﻳﻞ اﺗﺨﺎذ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪي‬
‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﺮاي اﺗﺨﺎد ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺘﻲ دﻻﻳﻞ ﻣﺘﻌﺪدي ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ: اول اﻳﻨﻜﻪ، ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﻛﺎر‬
‫واﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ ﺧﺮدهﻓﺮوش ﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي آﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺷﺪه ﻓﻀﺎي ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮي از ﻓﺮوﺷﮕﺎه ﻫﺎ را ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮد اﺧﺘﺼﺎص داده و‬
‫اﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎً ‪ shelf space‬ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺧﻮد را اﻓﺰاﻳﺶ ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ. دوم، ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﻛﻤﻲ وﺟﻮد دارﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺪري ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ وﻓﺎدار ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ وﺟﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دﻳﮕﺮي اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻧﻜﻨﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎرت دﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن،‬
‫ﻣﺮﺗﺐ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺼﺮﻓﻲ ﺧﻮد را ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ در ﻣﻮرد ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻣﺼﺮﻓﻲ روزﻣﺮه ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﻻﻫﺎي راﺣﺖ‬

‫2‬

‫ﻣﺤﺴﻮب ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ دﻳﺪه ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد. ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ راه ﺑﺮاي ﺗﺼﺎﺣﺐ اﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن اراﺋﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت‬
‫ﺑﻪ آﻧﻬﺎ اﺳﺖ. ﺳﻮم، اﻳﺠﺎد ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ اﻳﺠﺎد ﻫﻴﺠﺎن و ﻛﺎراﻳﻲ در ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻣﻲﮔﺮدد. ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘ‪ًĤ‬‬
‫دﻟﻴﻞ ﭼﻬﺎرم اﻳﻨﻜﻪ اﺗﺨﺎذ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﭼﻨﺪﺑﺮﻧﺪي، ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد ﺗﺎ ﻫﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺨﺶ3 ﺧﺎﺻﻲ از ﺑﺎزار را ﺟﺬب‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﻨﺪ.‬
‫اﻣﺎ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻫﻢ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ دام ﻫﺎﻳﻲ داﺷﺘﻪ و ﻣﺰاﻳﺎي ﺑﺮﺷﻤﺮده در ﺑﺎﻻ را ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه ﻧﺪاﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﻳﻜﻲ‬
‫از اﻳﻦ دام ﻫﺎ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻫﺮﻛﺪام از ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ، ﺳﻬﻢ ﺑﺎزار ﻛﻮﭼﻜﻲ ﻛﺴﺐ ﻛﺮده و ﻫﻴﭻ ﻛﺪام ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺰان‬
‫ﻣﻮرد اﻧﺘﻈﺎر ﺳﻮدآور ﻧﺒﺎﺷﻨﺪ. در اﻳﻦ ﺻﻮرت ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﺧﻮد را ﺑﺮاي اﻳﺠﺎد ﭼﻨﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻠﻒ ﻛﺮده در ﺻﻮرﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎي آﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﺴﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺤﺪودﺗﺮ )ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎظ ﺗﻌﺪاد( داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺳﻮدآوري ﻫﺮﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫اﻳﻦ دﺳﺘﻪ از ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮع ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﺧﺌﺪ را ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﺮده و از ﺑﺎزار ﺧﺎرج ﺳﺎزﻧﺪ و روﻳﻪﻫﺎي‬
‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫ ‪ Multibrand‬‬
‫‪ Convenient goods‬‬
‫٣‬
‫‪ Segment‬‬
‫٢‬

‫٨٣ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺗﺮي ﺑﺮاي اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺟﺪﻳﺪ در ﭘﻴﺶ ﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ. در ﺣﺎﻟﺖ اﻳﺪهآل، ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺘﻨﻮع ﻳﻚ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﺮاي ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻃﻮري وارد ﺑﺎزار ﺷﺪه و ﺑﺮ روي آﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت اﻧﺠﺎم ﺷﻮد ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎ ﺑﻴﺶ از اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫رﻗﺎﺑﺖ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎي رﻗﻴﺐ را ﻫﺪف ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﺑﻪ ﺳﻬﻢ ﺑﺎزار آﻧﻬﺎ ﺣﻤﻠﻪور ﮔﺮدﻧﺪ. رﻗﺎﺑﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ را در ادﺑﻴﺎت ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ اﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎً »ﺧﻮدﺧﻮري1« ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري ﻛﺮده اﻧﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﻠﻲ ﺣﺪاﻗﻞ‬
‫ﺳﻮددﻫﻲ و ﺟﺮﻳﺎن ﺧﺎﻟﺺ ﻧﻘﺪﻳﻨﮕﻲ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ از اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﭼﻨﺪﺑﺮﻧﺪي ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ از زﻣﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮدﺧﻮري در‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺷﺮﻛﺖ اﺗﻔﺎق ﻣﻲ اﻓﺘﺪ ]3[.‬

‫ﺑﺎزﻧﮕﺮي ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎه ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﺮ ﻋﻘﻴﺪة اﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨﺪان و ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪ ﭘﺮدازان ﺣﻮزة ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺮآﻣﺪ آﻧﻬﺎ ﻛﺎﺗﻠﺮ و آﻛﺮ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ و ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس‬
‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻓﻌﺎﻻن ﺑﺎزار و ﻣﺪﻳﺮان ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎي ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه از ﻗﺒﻴﻞ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﭘﺮوﻛﺘﺮ اﻧﺪ ﮔﻤﺒﻞ، ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻫﺮﻗﺪر ﻫﻢ در ﺑﺎزار از ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎه ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﻲ ﺑﺮﺧﻮردار ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، ﺑﺎز ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮور زﻣﺎن، ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻧﺎﮔﺰﻳﺮ از ﺑﺎزﻧﮕﺮي در‬
‫ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎه آن ﺑﻮده و ﺑﺎﻳﺪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎهﻳﺎﺑﻲ2 ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﺎ ﻧﮕﺎﻫﻲ ﺑﻪ روز ﺷﺪه، دوﺑﺎره ﭘﻴﺎدهﺳﺎزي‬
‫ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺪ. درﺳﺖ ﭘﺲ از ﻋﺮﺿﺔ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزار و ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﻧﺴﺒﻲ آن، ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻳﻚ رﻗﻴﺐ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دﻳﮕﺮي را ﺑﻪ دﻧﺒﺎل‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺷﻤﺎ رواﻧﺔ ﺑﺎزار ﻧﻤﻮده و ﺳﻬﻢ ﺑﺎزار ﺷﻤﺎ را ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﺑﻜﺸﺪ و ﻳﺎ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺤﺎت و ﺳﻼﻳﻖ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن،‬
‫ﺗﻘﺎﺿﺎ ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺷﻤﺎ رو ﺑﻪ اﻓﻮل ﺑﮕﺬارد.‬
‫در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺎزﻧﮕﺮي ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎه ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻣﺎﺟﺮاي ﻛﻤﭙﻴﻦ ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ‪ ،Seven‐Up‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﺜﺎل ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ در‬
‫اﻏﻠﺐ ﻣﺘﻮن ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻧﻘﻞ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ‪ Seven‐Up‬ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻮﺷﻴﺪﻧﻲ ﻏﻴﺮاﻟﻜﻠﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻃﻌﻢ ﻟﻴﻤﻮ ﺑﻮد ﻛﻪ ﻃﺮﻓﺪاران‬
‫زﻳﺎدي داﺷﺖ اﻣﺎ در ﻳﻚ دوره، ﻧﻮﺷﻴﺪﻧﻲ ﻫﺎي ﻣﻮﺳﻮم ﺑﻪ ﻛﻮﻻ )‪ (cola‬ﻣﻮرد ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‬
‫)ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ذاﺋﻘﺔ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن(. در اﻳﻦ دوره، ‪ Seven‐Up‬ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻛﺮد ﻛﻪ ﻫﻨﻮز ﻫﻢ اﻓﺮادي ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺷﻴﺪﻧﻲ ﻫﺎي ﻏﻴﺮﻛﻮﻻ را ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ ﺑﺪﻫﻨﺪ. ﻟﺬا ﺑﺎ ﭘﻴﺎدهﺳﺎزي ﻳﻚ ﻛﻤﭙﻴﻦ، ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﺗﺎ رﻫﺒﺮي ﺑﺎزار ﻏﻴﺮ ﻛﻮﻻﻫﺎ‬
‫را از آن ﺧﻮد ﻛﻨﺪ و در اﻳﻦ ﻛﻤﭙﻴﻦ، ﻧﻮﺷﻴﺪﻧﻲ ﺧﻮد را ‪ Uncola‬ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪ. در واﻗﻊ ‪ Seven‐Up‬ﺑﺎ اﺗﺨﺎذ اﻳﻦ‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي، ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن را ﻣﺘﻮﺟﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﻛﺮد ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎزار ﻧﻮﺷﻴﺪﻧﻲ ﻫﺎي ﻏﻴﺮاﻟﻜﻠﻲ دو ﺑﺨﺶ دارد: ﻛﻮﻻﻫﺎ و ﻏﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻛﻮﻻﻫﺎ و اﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ رﻫﺒﺮ ﺑﺎزار ﻏﻴﺮ ﻛﻮﻻﻫﺎ، ‪ Seven‐Up‬اﺳﺖ. ]1[‬

‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫ ‪ Cannibalism‬‬
‫ ‪ Positioning‬‬

‫٢‬

‫٩٣ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺑﻲ ﺷﻚ، ﺑﺮاي دﺳﺘﻴﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﭘﻴﺸﺮو و ارزشآﻓﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن، ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻚﺗﻚ اﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺮاﺣﻞ ﺿﺮوري ﺑﻮده و در ﻣﻮرد اﺑﻌﺎد و ﺟﻨﺒﻪﻫﺎي ﻫﺮﻛﺪام ﻣﻲﺗﻮان ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻓﺮاواﻧﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ و ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ. در‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ، ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ »ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﻣﻘﺎﻻت ﻓﺮاواﻧﻲ در ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻃﺮح ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺤﺚ در‬
‫ﻣﻮرد ﺟﻨﺒﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ اﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﻪ ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻪاﻧﺪ. ﺷﺎﻳﺪ اﮔﺮ ادﻋﺎ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ در ﻣﻴﺎن ﺑﺤﺜﻬﺎي ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ، ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﺤﺚ ﻣﻮرد ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎظ ﻃﺮح ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻣﺘﻨﻮع ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، ﺳﺨﻨﻲ ﮔﺰاف ﻧﮕﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ. ﺑﺮاي وارد‬
‫ﺷﺪن ﺑﻪ ﺑﺤﺚ، دو ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ در اﻳﻦ زﻣﻴﻨﻪ اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺷﺪه ﻛﻪ ﺣﻮزة ﻣﻮد ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺔ آﻧﻬﺎ در ﻣﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺴﻴﺎر ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ‬
‫ﻧﺰدﻳﻚ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬

‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺎزﻧﺪه؟‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ اول ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮان »ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎي اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ1« در ﻣﻮرد ﺷﻜﻞ اﺟﺮاي اﻳﻦ‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي و ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺜﺒﺖ و ﻣﻨﻔﻲ آن، ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺎﺗﻲ را ﻣﻄﺮح ﻧﻤﻮده و ﺑﺎ ﻃﺮاﺣﻲ آزﻣﺎﻳﺸﺎﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﺎً ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮرت‬
‫ﭘﻴﻤﺎﻳﺸﻲ ﺑﻮده اﻧﺪ آﻧﻬﺎ را آزﻣﻮن ﻛﺮده اﺳﺖ. در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ، ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺪون ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ( ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﺷﺪه و در اﻳﻦ ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ، »ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل2«‬
‫ﻣﺤﻮر ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ. ﻳﻚ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺮاي ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل، ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ درك ﺷﺪه ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﺸﺘﺮي،‬
‫ﺑﻴﻦ دو ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ دو ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺷﺪه ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ.‬
‫در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ در ﺳﻪ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻲﺷﻮد: ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت، درﺟﺔ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺰﻳﻨﻲ ﺑﻴﻦ دﺳﺘﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت، ﻣﻴﺰان ﻣﻜﻤﻞ ﺑﻮدن دﺳﺘﻪ ﻫﺎ )دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اﺻﻠﻲ و دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ(. ﺑﺎ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ »ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ« ﻳﻜﻲ از‬
‫اﺑﻌﺎد ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ وﻟﻲ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن آﻧﻬﺎ را ﻫﻢﻣﻌﻨﻲ در ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪاﻧﺪ. ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل، ﺑﺎزﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ آن را‬
‫ﺗﺴﻬﻴﻞ ﻧﻤﻮده و ﺑﺮ روي ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻛﻪ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﻓﻌﺎل ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ اﺛﺮﮔﺬار ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد. ﻫﺮﭼﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه، ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﺧﻮد از ﻣﺤﺼﻮل‬
‫ﻗﺒﻠﻲ را راﺣﺖﺗﺮ ﻣﻨﺘﻘﻞ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ ارﺗﺒﺎط ﻣﻤﻜﻦ اﺳﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت وﻳﮋه و ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺘﻬﺎي ارﺗﺒﺎﻃﻲ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﺖ‬
‫ﮔﺮدد. ﻟﺬا ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺷﺪه و ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺎت ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺣﻮل‬
‫ﺟﻨﺒﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻃﺮاﺣﻲ ﺷﺪه اﻧﺪ.‬

‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫ ‪ Derived versus full name brand extensions‬‬
‫‪ Product fit‬‬

‫٢‬

‫٠٤ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ دوم ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮان »ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت1« ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ. ﻣﻨﻈﻮر از اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي، ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺜﺒﺖ و ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﻣﺤﺘﻤﻞ، ﭘﺲ از اراﺋﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻟﻲ در ﻗﺎﻟﺐ‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ وﺟﻬﻪ و ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. اﺑﻌﺎد ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ وﺟﻬﺔ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪف در‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮان »ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ2« ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن در ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻗﺒﻠﻲ، ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎت‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺗﺤﺖ ﻋﻨﻮان ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري ﻧﻤﻮده و ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات اﺑﻌﺎد ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ آن را ﺑﺮ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻧﻤﻮده اﻧﺪ. در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ، »ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ«، »ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« و »وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان‬
‫اﺑﻌﺎد اﺻﻠﻲ ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه اﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﻌﺪ اول ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ اﺷﺎره ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮاﻧﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺮدم در ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎ آوردن و ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎد آوردن ﺑﺮﻧﺪي ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻟﻲ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‬
‫را اراﺋﻪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ دارد. ﺑﻌﺪ دوم، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، اﺷﺎره ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮداﺷﺘﻬﺎي ذﻫﻨﻲ ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ واﺳﻄﺔ‬
‫ارﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎت ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎزار ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪﻫﺎي ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲدﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺼﺮف‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻬﺘﺮي اﻳﺠﺎد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﺑﻌﺪ ﺳﻮم ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮر از آن ﻳﻚ ﺗﻌﻬﺪ ﺑﻠﻨﺪﻣﺪت ﺑﻪ ﺧﺮﻳﺪ دوﺑﺎره ﺑﻮده و ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﻣﻜﺮر و وﺟﻬﺔ ﻣﻄﻠﻮب را ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻲﮔﺮدد.‬
‫وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ از ﺑﺮداﺷﺘﻬﺎ و ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﻣﺜﺒﺖ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻲآﻳﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﺎﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ ﻣﻄﺮح ﺷﺪه در ﺧﺼﻮص اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، در ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ دو ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﺑﺎﻻ و ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ‬
‫ﻣﺬﻛﻮر در ﺑﺨﺸﻬﺎي ﻣﺮور ادﺑﻴﺎت ﻫﺮﻳﻚ از آﻧﻬﺎ، اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻳﻚ راﻫﺒﺮد ﻛﻠﻴﺪي در ﻋﺮﺿﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻣﻲ ﮔﺮدد. در ﻫﺮ دو ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ، ﻣﺰاﻳﺎي اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از اﻳﻦ راﻫﺒﺮد از دﻳﺪﮔﺎهﻫﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ ﺷﺪه و در ﻛﻨﺎر‬
‫آن ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ آن ﻧﻴﺰ ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮر ﻛﻪ اﺷﺎره ﺷﺪ، اﺻﻠﻲ ﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﺰﻳﺖ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي، ﺑﻬﺮه ﺟﺴﺘﻦ از‬
‫ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺪن ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮرد در ﻫﺮﻳﻚ از ﻣﻘﺎﻻت ﺑﻪ زﺑﺎن ﻣﺘﻔﺎوﺗﻲ ﻣﻮرد‬
‫ﺗﺎﻛﻴﺪ ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ.‬

‫اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ‬
‫ﻳﻜﻲ از ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺜﻲ ﻛﻪ در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻻت ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺤﺚ ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ، اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ و ﺗﺪاﻋﻴﺎت ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬
‫اﺳﺖ. ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻣﺪام در ﺣﺎل ﻣﺒﺎدﻟﺔ داﻧﺴﺘﻪﻫﺎ و ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﺧﻮد از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺳﺖ و‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮات اﻳﺠﺎد ﺷﺪه در ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ. ﺑﺴﻴﺎري از ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن »اﺛﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ« ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺎن اﻧﺘﻘﺎل‬
‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫‪ Brand extension feedback: The role of advertising‬‬
‫‪ Brand equity‬‬

‫٢‬

‫١٤ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﻛﺮدهاﻧﺪ در ﺣﺎﻟﻴﻜﻪ »اﺛﺮ ﻣﻌﻜﻮس« ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺮ‬
‫روي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﺴﻴﺎري را ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮد ﺟﻠﺐ ﻛﺮده اﺳﺖ ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻛﻤﺮﻧﮓ‬
‫ﺷﺪن ﺗﺪاﻋﻲ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﻳﺠﺎد ﺷﺪه ﮔﺮدد.‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﻧﺘﺨﺎب ﺷﺪة ﺟﺪﻳﺪ درواﻗﻊ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ آﻏﺎزﻳﻦ رﻓﺘﺎر ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه در ﺑﺮاﺑﺮ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻲ-‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻗﺮار اﺳﺖ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اراﺋﻪ ﺷﻮد، ﭘﺲ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه، ﺗﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ از ﺧﺮﻳﺪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل و‬
‫ﻣﺼﺮف آن ﻫﻴﭻ اﻳﺪهاي در راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎت ﻛﻴﻔﻲ آن ﻧﺪارد. ﻟﺬا ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻨﺒﻊ وي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد. اﮔﺮ‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، اﺣﺘﻤﺎل اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﺧﺮﻳﺪاري ﺷﻮد ﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ زﻳﺎدي ﺑﻪ‬
‫وﻳﮋﮔﻴﻬﺎي رﻓﺘﺎري ﻣﺸﺘﺮي در ﻣﻮرد ﺧﺮﻳﺪ دارد ﻛﻪ ﻧﮕﺎرﻧﺪه آن را »ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ ﺧﺮﻳﺪ« ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ ﻫﺮﻛﺲ‬
‫در ﻗﺒﺎل ﺧﺮﻳﺪ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺮﺧﻲ اﻓﺮاد ﺑﻪ راﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ وﻓﺎدار ﺷﺪه و ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ وﺟﻪ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﻪ اﻣﺘﺤﺎن ﻛﺮدن‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي دﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻣﻮردﻧﻈﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ وﻓﺎداري ﻟﺰوﻣﺎً ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ دﻟﻴﻞ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺧﻴﻠﻲ ﺧﺎص ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻧﻴﺴﺖ. اﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺧﻲ اﻓﺮاد ﺑﻪ راﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺧﻮد را در ﭼﺮوﺳﺔ ﺧﺮﻳﺪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ. ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ و وﻳﮋﮔﻴﻬﺎي ﻣﺤﺼﻮل روي‬
‫اﻳﻦ رﻓﺘﺎر ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ دارد. ﻓﻴﻠﻴﭗ ﻛﺎﺗﻠﺮ اﻳﻦ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن را ‪ brand switchers‬ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪه اﺳﺖ و در ﻛﺘﺎب‬
‫ﻣﺪﻳﺮﻳﺖ ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ، اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﭼﻨﺪﺑﺮﻧﺪي را ﺑﺮاي ﺗﺼﺎﺣﺐ اﻳﻦ ﻧﻮع ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ.‬
‫ﺧﻄﺮﻧﺎكﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﺨﺶ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺟﺬب و ﻧﮕﻬﺪاري ‪brand switcher‬ﻫﺎﺳﺖ.‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮر ﻛﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻨﺒﻊ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻗﻀﺎوت و ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺸﺘﺮي از ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل، ﻗﺒﻞ از اوﻟﻴﻦ ﺧﺮﻳﺪ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ آن‬
‫اﺳﺖ. وﻗﺘﻲ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ﻣﻮرد ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﭘﻴﺎده ﺷﺪه ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، اﺣﺘﻤﺎﻻً ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺸﺘﺮي آﺷﻨﺎ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد.‬
‫اﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻣﻴﺰان اﻳﻦ آﺷﻨﺎﻳﻲ ﺑﺴﺘﮕﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺰان ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ در ﺑﺎزار دارد ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ اﺗﺨﺎذ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﺎ‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﻓﺮض ﻛﻪ ﻗﺮار اﺳﺖ از ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ و وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺷﻮد ﻣﻄﺮح ﻛﺮدهاﻳﻢ. ﻟﺬا ﻣﺸﺘﺮي، ﻣﺤﺼﻮل را ﻣﻲ-‬
‫ﺑﻴﻨﺪ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ آن را ﻣﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﺪ و ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎد ﻣﻲآورد ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﻗﺒﻼً روي ﭼﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻳﺎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻﺗﻲ دﻳﺪه اﺳﺖ. در‬
‫اﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﻪ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻣﻄﺮح ﻣﻲﮔﺮدد. ﻣﻨﻈﻮر از ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل، ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ درك ﺷﺪه‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﺑﻴﻦ دو ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ]4[.‬
‫ﻓﺮض ﻛﻨﻴﺪ ﺷﻤﺎ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎل از ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﭘﺮوﭘﺎﻗﺮص ﺑﺴﺘﻨﻲﻫﺎي »آﻳﺲﭘﻚ« ﺑﻮدهاﻳﺪ. ﻳﻚ روز ﺑﺮاي ﺧﺮﻳﺪ ﻟﺒﺎس‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮوﺷﮕﺎﻫﻲ ﻣﻲروﻳﺪ و ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻲ-ﺷﺮت ﺑﺎ ﻣﺎرك آﻳﺲﭘﻚ ﻣﻮاﺟﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮﻳﺪ. ﻳﻜﻲ از ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ آزﻣﻮن ﻓﺮضﻫﺎي ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ‬
‫اول اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ درك ﺷﺪه ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ، ﺑﺮ ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺛﺮ‬
‫ﻣﺜﺒﺖ دارد. ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﻫﺮ ﻗﺪر اﻳﻦ ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻣﻄﻠﻮبﺗﺮي از ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﭘﻴﺪا ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﻛﺮد. ﻟﺬا‬
‫٢٤ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫اﺣﺘﻤﺎل ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺗﻲ-ﺷﺮت ﻫﺎي آﻳﺲ ﭘﻚ ﺑﺎ در ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ اﻳﻦ راﺑﻄﻪ، ﻧﺎﭼﻴﺰ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺑﻮد. ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺷﺮاﻳﻂ را در ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎوت ﻛﻪ ﻣﺜﻼً ﺷﻤﺎ در ﻗﻔﺴﺔ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮﭘﺮﻣﺎرﻛﺖ، ﺷﻜﻼﺗﻬﺎي ﻛﺎﻛﺎﺋﻮﻳﻲ آﻳﺲﭘﻚ را ﺑﺒﻴﻨﻴﺪ. ﻓﺮدي ﻛﻪ‬
‫در زﻣﺮة ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن وﻓﺎدار ﺑﺴﺘﻨﻲ آﻳﺲ ﭘﻚ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ، در ﻣﻮاﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻟﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﺰان ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ، ﺑﻪ‬
‫اﺣﺘﻤﺎل ﺧﻴﻠﻲ زﻳﺎد ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را اﻣﺘﺤﺎن ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﻛﺮد. در ﺻﻮرﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )در اﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺷﻜﻼت‬
‫ﻛﺎﻛﺎﺋﻮﻳﻲ( ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﻣﻄﻠﻮب را داﺷﺘﻪ و ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎن ﻣﻴﺰاﻧﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺴﺘﻨﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﻓﺮد ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﻴﺖ داﺷﺖ، وي را ارﺿﺎ ﻛﻨﺪ، در‬
‫اﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ در ﺑﺮاﺑﺮ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ آﻳﺲ ﭘﻚ ﻛﻼه از ﺳﺮ ﺑﺮداﺷﺖ. ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ در‬
‫ﺑﺎزار ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺷﺪه و ﻫﻢ وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ آﻳﺲﭘﻚ را ﺑﻴﺶ از ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻄﻠﻮب ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ.‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﻮرﻳﺖ اﻳﻦ ﻣﺜﺎل ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮان ﺑﻪ ﺑﺤﺚﻫﺎي ﻓﺮﻋﻲ ﻣﻄﺮح ﺷﺪه در دو ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﭘﺮداﺧﺖ.‬

‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه‬
‫ﺳﻮال اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ اول ﻫﻤﻴﻦ اﺳﺖ. اﻳﻨﻜﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺰاﻳﺎي ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻲ دارد ﺑﺮ ﻣﺎ روﺷﻦ اﺳﺖ.‬
‫اﻣﺎ ﺷﻜﻞ ﭘﻴﺎدهﺳﺎزي آن ﻫﻢ ﻣﻬﻢ اﺳﺖ. ﻗﺮار اﺳﺖ در اﻳﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي، ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻲ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ را ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻲ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را در وﻳﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻓﺮوﺷﮕﺎه، ﻗﻔﺴﺔ ﺳﻮﭘﺮﻣﺎرﻛﺖ و ﻳﺎ ﺗﻴﺰر ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ ﻣﻲﺑﻴﻨﺪ، ﺑﻪ ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺸﺘﺮي‬
‫ﻣﺘﺒﺎدر ﺳﺎزﻳﻢ. ﻳﻚ راه اﺗﺨﺎذ ﺷﻴﻮة ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ اﺳﺖ. ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را دﻗﻴﻘﺎً ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﺎن ﻧﺎم اﺻﻠﻲ و ﺑﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎي‬
‫آن ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزار ﺑﻔﺮﺳﺘﻴﻢ )ﺷﻜﻼت ﻛﺎﻛﺎﺋﻮﻳﻲ آﻳﺲﭘﻚ(. اﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﻮه ﻋﻤﻮﻣﺎً در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ از ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﭼﺸﻤﮕﻴﺮي‬
‫در ﺑﺎزار ﺑﺮﺧﻮردار ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ اﻧﺠﺎم ﻣﻲﺷﻮد. ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎي واﻗﻌﻲ اﺗﺨﺎذ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺷﻴﻮهاي در ﺑﺎزار ﻓﺮاوان ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ. ﺷﺮﻛﺖ‬
‫»ﮔﺮوه ﺻﻨﺎﻳﻊ ﻏﺬاﻳﻲ ﺑﻬﺮوز« ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺧﻮد )اﻧﻮاع ﺳﺲ ﻣﺎﻳﻮﻧﺰ، ﻛﭽﺎپ، رب ﮔﻮﺟﻪ ﻓﺮﻧﮕﻲ و...( را ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫»ﺑﻬﺮوز« ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ. اﻛﺜﺮ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻟﻮازم اﻟﻜﺘﺮوﻧﻴﻜﻲ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ‪ LG ،Samsung ،Sony‬و... ﻧﻴﺰ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﺎً‬
‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ راﻫﺒﺮدي را اﺗﺨﺎذ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ.‬
‫راه دﻳﮕﺮ اﺗﺨﺎذ ﺷﻴﻮة ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ اﺳﺖ. ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺷﺪه از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ، ﻫﻢ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ و ﻫﻢ از ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ آوردهاﻳﻢ، ﺑﻪ ﻫﺪف اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﻫﻢ دﺳﺖ ﭘﻴﺪا ﻛﻨﻴﻢ.‬
‫ﺷﻴﻮة ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ اﺟﺮاﺳﺖ ]3[، اول: ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺑﺨﺸﻲ از ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻪاي ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻌﺮف دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ‪ Nestle‬آﺷﻨﺎﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﺜﺎل اﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﻮه اﺳﺖ. »ﭼﺎي ﺳﺮد ‪ «Nestea‬و‬
‫»ﻗﻬﻮه ﻓﻮري ‪ «Nescafe‬ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﺑﻲﻧﻈﻴﺮي در ﺑﺎزار ﻛﺴﺐ ﻛﺮدهاﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮري ﻛﻪ در اﻳﺮان، از ﻟﻐﺖ »ﻧﺴﻜﺎﻓﻪ«‬
‫ﺑﺮاي ﻫﺮ ﻧﻮع ﻗﻬﻮه ﻓﻮري ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻫﺮ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ دﻳﮕﺮي اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ )ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي »ﭘﻔﻚ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻜﻲ« و »ﺳﺎﻧﺪﻳﺲ« اﻓﺘﺎد(. دوم: اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺨﺸﻲ از ﻧﺎم ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻪاي ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﺮف ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮم‬
‫٣٤ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﻛﻠﻲ و ﻧﺸﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﻳﻚ وﻳﮋﮔﻲ1 ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺑﺎز ﻫﻢ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ‪ Nestle‬در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮرد ﻣﺜﺎل ﺟﺎﻟﺒﻲ دارد.‬
‫‪ Nesquick‬ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻﺗﻲ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﭘﻮدر ﺷﺮﺑﺖ، ﭘﻮدر ﺷﻜﻼت، ﭘﻮدر ﻛﻴﻚ و... ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ وﻳﮋﮔﻲ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮك ﻫﻤﺔ آﻧﻬﺎ »ﺳﺮﻳﻊ« آﻣﺎده ﺷﺪن ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ اﻳﺮاﻧﻲ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﻨﻨﺪه از اﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﻮه ﻣﻲﺗﻮان‬
‫»ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﻬﺪاد« را ﻣﺜﺎل زد. اﻳﻢ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺳﺎﻟﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ »ﺗﺎژ« در ﺑﺎزار ﻣﻮاد ﺷﻮﻳﻨﺪه، ﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎً ﭘﻮدرﻫﺎي ﺷﻮﻳﻨﺪه،‬
‫ﺳﻬﻤﻲ را ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮد اﺧﺘﺼﺎص داده ﺑﻮد و ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺧﻮد را ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻲﻛﺮد اﻣﺎ در ﺳﺎﻟﻬﺎي‬
‫اﺧﻴﺮ ﺷﺎﻫﺪ اﺗﺨﺎذ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺘﻬﺎي ﺟﺪﻳﺪي در اﻳﻦ ارﺗﺒﺎط از ﺟﺎﻧﺐ اﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﻮدهاﻳﻢ. ﭘﻮدرﻫﺎي ﻣﺨﺼﻮص ﺷﺴﺘﺸﻮي‬
‫ﻟﺒﺎسﻫﺎي ﺗﻴﺮه و رﻧﮕﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي »ﻣﺸﻜﻴﻦﺗﺎژ« و »رﻧﮕﻴﻦﺗﺎژ« را ﻣﻲﺗﻮان از اﻳﻦ ﻧﻮع ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ داﻧﺴﺖ.‬
‫ﺳﻮﻣﻴﻦ ﺷﻜﻞ از اﺟﺮاي ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، اﻳﺠﺎد ﻧﺎم ﻣﺴﺘﻌﺎر2 اﺳﺖ. اﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﻮه ﻃﺮﻓﺪاران ﻛﻤﺘﺮي دارد‬
‫ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ ﭘﺮوﺳﺔ اﻧﺘﻘﺎل ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ در آن ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺸﺘﺮي ﻣﺸﻜﻞ ﺑﻮده و ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻲ از آن اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺗﺨﺼﺼﻲﺗﺮ و اﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎً ﻏﻴﺮ روﺗﻴﻦ3 از آن اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻳﻲ از اﻳﻦ ﻧﻮع ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﻣﻲﺗﻮان ﺑﻪ ‪ CAT‬ﺑﺮاي ‪ ،Caterpillar‬ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪة ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎي راﻫﺴﺎزي، ‪ TED‬ﺑﺮاي ﺧﺪﻣﺎت ﻫﻮاﻳﻲ ﻣﻮﺷﻜﻲ‬
‫‪ UNITED‬و ﻳﺎ ‪ FedEx‬ﺑﺮاي ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺣﻤﻞوﻧﻘﻞ ‪ Federal Express‬اﺷﺎره ﻧﻤﻮد ﻛﻪ اﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﺟﺎﻟﺐ در ﻣﻮرد‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ آﺧﺮ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺒﻞ از اﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ‪ Federal Express‬ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از اﻳﻦ ﻧﺎم ﻣﺴﺘﻌﺎر در ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺧﻮد ﺑﮕﻴﺮد، ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن اﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ آن را ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻧﺎم ﻣﻲﺧﻮاﻧﺪﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه از آزﻣﻮنﻫﺎي ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ اول در ﻣﻮرد اﺛﺮ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل، اﮔﺮﭼﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻓﺎﻛﺘﻮر ﺑﺮ ﻧﺤﻮة‬
‫ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ اﺛﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ دارد وﻟﻲ ﻣﻴﺰان اﻳﻦ اﺛﺮ در ﺣﺎﻟﺖ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ و اﺳﺘﻘﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه ﺗﻔﺎوت ﭼﻨﺪاﻧﻲ ﻧﺪارد.‬

‫ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي‬
‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮر از اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي، ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺜﺒﺖ و ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﻣﺤﺘﻤﻞ، ﭘﺲ از اراﺋﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻟﻲ در ﻗﺎﻟﺐ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ وﺟﻬﻪ و ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ اﺛﺮات در ﻫﺮ دو ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ از ﺟﻨﺒﻪﻫﺎي ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻲ‬
‫ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. در ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ اول ﻳﻜﻲ از ﻓﺮضﻫﺎي ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ در ﺻﻮرﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﻧﺮﺳﺪ، ﺗﺒﻌﺎت و ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﻨﻔﻲ اﻳﻦ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ، در ﺻﻮرﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺷﺪه از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ‬
‫ ‬
‫١‬

‫‪ Feature‬‬
‫ ‪ Nickname‬‬
‫٣‬
‫ ‪ Inconvenient‬‬
‫٢‬

‫٤٤ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﺮده ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ، ﻛﻤﺘﺮ داﻣﻨﮕﻴﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ. اﻟﺒﺘﻪ در ﺻﻮرت اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي، ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺜﺒﺖ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﻫﻢ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻛﻤﺘﺮي ﺑﺮ وﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ دارد ﺗﺎ اﻳﻨﻜﻪ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده‬
‫ﺷﺪه ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ آزﻣﻮن اﻳﻦ ﻓﺮضﻫﺎ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲدﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻮاﻗﻊ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﺿﺮر‬
‫ﻛﻤﺘﺮي ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ وارد ﻣﻲآورﻧﺪ اﻣﺎ در ﻣﻮاﻗﻊ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ، اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎي ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري اﺛﺮات ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ‬
‫دارﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع اﺛﺮ ﺣﻔﺎﻇﺘﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ را ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ. درواﻗﻊ ﻣﻲﺗﻮان ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي‬
‫ﻧﺎﻣﮕﺬاري در ارزﻳﺎﺑﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺻﻠﻲ اﻫﻤﻴﺖ دارد و ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎً ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه، اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي ﺟﺎﻟﺒﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﺗﺤﺖ ﭘﻮﺷﺶ‬
‫ﻗﺮار دادن رﻳﺴﻚ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮردي ﻣﺤﺴﻮب ﻣﻲﮔﺮدد.‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻟﺤﺎظ ﻛﺮدن اﻳﻦ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻣﻲﺗﻮان ﮔﻔﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ »ﺑﻬﺮوز« ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮاي ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺷﺮﻛﺖ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده‬
‫ﻣﻲﺷﻮﻧﺪ، ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ در ﺧﻄﺮ ﻛﻤﺮﻧﮓ ﺷﺪن و ﺗﺨﺮﻳﺐ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺧﻮد ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﭼﺮا ﻛﻪ در ﺻﻮرت ﺑﺮوز اﺷﺘﺒﺎﻫﻲ در ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻳﻜﻲ از ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪي ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻗﺮار اﺳﺖ رواﻧﺔ ﺑﺎزار ﺷﻮﻧﺪ، وﺟﻬﺔ ﻛﻠﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ زﻳﺮ ﺳﻮال ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ رﻓﺖ. اﻟﺒﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻓﺎﻛﺘﻮرﻫﺎي دﻳﮕﺮي ﻫﻢ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﻨﺪة اﺛﺮات ﺑﺎزﺧﻮرد ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﻓﺎﻛﺘﻮرﻫﺎ در ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ دوم ﺗﺤﺖ ﻋﻨﻮان‬
‫»اﺑﻌﺎد ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ« ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﺷﺪه و ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ اﻧﺪ.‬
‫ﺑﺤﺚ در ﻣﻮرد اﺑﻌﺎد ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، دو ﺑﺨﺶ اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺨﺶ اول ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺎﺗﻲ در راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮات ﻣﺘﻘﺎﺑﻞ اﻳﻦ‬
‫اﺑﻌﺎد ﺑﺮ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ رواﺑﻂ ﻣﺘﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻋﺒﺎرﺗﻨﺪ از اﺛﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و اﺛﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ‬
‫وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ دوي اﻳﻦ ﻓﺮضﻫﺎ در آزﻣﻮن ﺻﻮررت ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ دوم ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﺷﺪهاﻧﺪ. درواﻗﻊ وﻗﺘﻲ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻳﺎن ﻧﺎم ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﻪ راﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ آورده و وﻳﮋﮔﻲﻫﺎ و ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺒﻼً ﺗﺤﺖ اﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ آﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺧﻮرد داﺷﺘﻪاﻧﺪ ﻣﺮور ﻛﻨﻨﺪ )ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ ﺑﺎﻻ( ﻧﺸﺎن دﻫﻨﺪة ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﻄﻠﻮب ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘﺎً ﺷﻤﺎ اﮔﺮ از ﻣﺼﺮف ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﻳﺎ ﺧﺪﻣﺘﻲ ﻧﺎراﺿﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﺪ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ آن در ذﻫﻨﺘﺎن ﻧﻤﻲﻣﺎﻧﺪ و ﻳﺎ در ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺧﺎﻃﺮة ﺑﺪي از آن ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ذﻫﻨﺘﺎن ﻧﻘﺶ ﻣﻲﺑﻨﺪد. اﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎن ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻧﺎﻣﻄﻠﻮب ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ در ﺻﻮرت‬
‫آﮔﺎﻫﻲ و داﺷﺘﻦ داﻣﻨﻪاي از اﻃﻼﻋﺎت در ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و وﻳﮋﮔﻴﻬﺎي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﻗﺒﻠﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻧﺎم آن ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺼﺮف‬
‫ﻛﺮدهاﻳﺪ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ واﺿﺢﺗﺮ و اﺣﺘﻤﺎﻻً ﻣﻄﻠﻮبﺗﺮي ﻫﻢ از آن ﺧﻮاﻫﻴﺪ داﺷﺖ. ﭘﺲ از ﺛﺒﺖ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﻄﻠﻮب از ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ در ذﻫﻦ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪة ﻧﻮﻋﻲ، ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻲ و ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻲ آن اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ در دﻓﻌﺎت ﺑﻌﺪي ﺧﺮﻳﺪ اﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل،‬
‫ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه دوﺑﺎره اﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺧﺮﻳﺪاري ﻛﺮده و در ﺻﻮرت ﺗﺪاوم رﺿﺎﻳﺖ، ﭼﻴﺰي ﻛﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﻓﺰوﻧﻲ ﻣﻲﻳﺎﺑﺪ‬
‫وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ.‬
‫٥٤ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬
‫ ‬

‫ﺑﺨﺶ دوم ﺑﺤﺚ در ﻣﻮرد ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ، ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ اﺑﻌﺎد ارزش ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه از اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋي‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ. اﻳﻦ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ در ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺳﻪ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ در ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ دوم ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫در ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ، ادﻋﺎي ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺪآﮔﺎﻫﻲ و وﻓﺎداري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ رد ﺷﺪه و ﻓﻘﻂ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. اﻳﻦ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ، اﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺗﺜﺒﻴﺖ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﻄﻠﻮب از ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫در ذﻫﻦ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪه را ﺑﻴﺶ از ﭘﻴﺶ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺎن ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ. ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﻛﻠﻴﺪي ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺤﺚ در راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺎت و ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ‬
‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ از آزﻣﻮن آﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻄﺮح اﺳﺖ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻫﺎي آﻧﺎن داراي ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﺜﺒﺘﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ اﻳﻦ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ‬
‫را دارﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺧﻮد را ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻻت ﺟﺪﻳﺪ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪاي از ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻮﻓﻖ اﻳﺮاﻧﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮي ﻛﺎﻣﻼً‬
‫ﻣﻄﻠﻮب ﻛﻪ ﭘﺘﺎﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺷﺪﻳﺪي ﺑﺮاي ﭘﻴﺎدهﺳﺎزي ﻳﻚ ﭘﺮوژة ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را دارد ﺑﻪ زﻋﻢ ﻧﮕﺎرﻧﺪه، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ »آﻳﺲﭘﻚ«‬
‫اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ اﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻫﻨﻮز ﻣﺪﻳﺮان آن ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺴﺘﺮش اﻓﻘﻲ ﻛﺴﺐوﻛﺎر ﺧﻮد ﻧﮕﺮﻓﺘﻪ و ﺑﻪ ﺷﺪت در ﺻﺪد ﮔﺴﺘﺮش‬
‫ﻋﻤﻮدي و ﺗﻌﻤﻴﻖ آن ﻫﺘﺴﻨﺪ و اﻟﺒﺘﻪ در اﻳﻦ راه ﺑﺴﻴﺎر ﻫﻢ ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﺑﻮدهاﻧﺪ. ]5[‬

‫ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت‬
‫ﻧﻜﺘﺔ اﺳﺎﺳﻲ ﻛﻪ در اﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻣﻄﺮح ﻣﻲﺷﻮد ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت اﺳﺖ. ﻫﺪف از ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت، ﭼﻴﺰي ﻓﺮاﺗﺮ از ﺗﺤﻘﻖ‬
‫اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋﻳﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺗﺜﺒﻴﺖ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻣﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﻫﺮﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت، ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻳﺎ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ، ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را‬
‫ﻣﻨﻌﻜﺲ ﺳﺎزد، ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﻗﺎدر ﺧﻮاﻫﻨﺪ ﺑﻮد ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ و ﺑﺮﻧﺪ راﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺮﻗﺮار ﻛﺮده و ﺷﻤﺎي ﻛﻠﻲ آﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﭼﺸﻤﮕﻴﺮي ﻧﺨﻮاﻫﺪ ﻛﺮد. ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﺎ اﻗﺪاﻣﺎت‬
‫ﺑﺎزارﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻛﻤﭙﻴﻦ ﻫﺎي ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ دﻫﻨﺪ. ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﻠﻲ، اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت ﺷﺎﻧﺲ اﻗﺒﺎل ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را اﻓﺰاﻳﺶ ﻣﻲ دﻫﺪ. اﻃﻼﻋﺎﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ از ﻃﺮﻳﻖ اﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺘﻬﺎي ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ اراﺋﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻣﻲﺗﻮاﻧﻨﺪ اﺛﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ را ﺗﻌﺪﻳﻞ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻟﺬا ﺷﺮﻛﺖﻫﺎ، ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ را ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎر ﻣﻲ ﺑﻨﺪﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﺎﻣﻞ، ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﻗﺒﻠﻲ و‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. ﺗﺠﺰﻳﻪ و ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ اﺛﺮات ﺗﻌﺪﻳﻠﮕﺮ ﻧﺸﺎن ﻣﻲدﻫﺪ زﻣﺎﻧﻴﻜﻪ ﻣﺼﺮفﻛﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮة‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎت دﺳﺘﺮﺳﻲ داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻗﻮﻳﺘﺮي ﺑﺮ ﻃﺮز ﺗﻠﻘﻲ از ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ‬
‫دارد.‬
‫در ﻓﻀﺎي ﻛﺴﺐ و ﻛﺎر، ﺷﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺼﺪ اراﺋﻪ و ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ( دارﻧﺪ، ﺑﺮاي ﺣﺪاﻗﻞ ﺳﺎزي‬
‫رﻳﺴﻚ ﻛﻤﺮﻧﮓ ﺷﺪن ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﻣﺠﺒﻮر ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ را ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮداﺷﺘﻬﺎي ﻓﻌﻠﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ‬
‫دﻫﻨﺪ. ﺟﺪاي از دﺳﺘﻪ اي ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺑﻪ آن ﺗﻌﻠﻖ دارد، ﻻزم اﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﻣﺰﻳﺘﻬﺎي ﺑﺮﻧﺪ را از ﺑﺎزاري ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎزار دﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺘﻘﻞ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ. وﻗﺘﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪي ﻣﺸﻬﻮر ﺑﻮده و ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﻲ دارد، ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮد ﺗﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻛﻤﭙﻴﻦ ﻫﺎي ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻲ ﺑﺮاي‬
‫٦٤ ‬
‫ ‬

‫ ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻳﻨﮓ و ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ: ﻣﺰاﻳﺎ و ﻣﻌﺎﻳﺐ، ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎ و راﻫﻜﺎرﻫﺎ‬

‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮل ﺟﺪﻳﺪ، ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺼﺮف ﻛﻨﻨﺪه ﻳﺎدآوري ﺷﻮد. ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮاﻳﻦ، ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ اوﻟﻴﻪ، ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﻗﻮﻳﺘﺮي ﺑﺮ وﺟﻬﺔ‬ .‫ﺑﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ )ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ( و ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻲ از ﺑﺮﻧﺪ دارد‬

‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ‬
١. Philip Kotler, Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and
Control (Prentice Hall, ١٩٩٠)
٢. Al Ries and Jack Trout, Positioning: The Battle For Your Mind (New York:
McGrow‐Hill, ١٩٨١)
٣. Mark B. Taylor, “Cannibalism in Multibrand Firms”, Journal of Business
Research, Spring ١٩٨٦, pp. ٦٩-٧٥.
٤. Sergio Olavarrieta, et al. , “Derived versus full name brand extensions”, Journal of Business Research, (٢٠٠٩) pp. ٨٩٩-٩٠٥.
٥. Eva Martinez, et al. , “Brand extension feedback: The role of advertising”,
Journal of Business Research, (٢٠٠٩) pp. ٣٠٥-٣١٣.

٤٧

:1 ‫ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺖ‬

Derived versus full name extensions

Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 899–905

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Business Research

Derived versus full name brand extensions
Sergio Olavarrieta a,⁎, Eduardo Torres b, Arturo Vásquez-Parraga c, Cristóbal Barra b a b c Universidad Diego Portales, Av. Manuel Rodríguez Sur 253, Santiago, Chile
Universidad de Chile, Diagonal Paraguay 256 Of. 1105, Santiago, Chile
The University of Texas-Pan American, College of Business Administration, 1201 West University drive, Edinburg, TX 78539, USA

article
Keywords:
Brands
Derived brand names
Brand extensions
Full name

info

abstract
Most brand extension studies follow the assumption that brand extensions use the full original parent brand name (e.g., Oral-B tooth brush may extend to Oral-B dental floss). However, some companies use derived brand names in their brand extension strategies (e.g. Nestea Iced Tea). This study explores the advantages and disadvantages of derived brand extensions compared to full name extensions. The study examines the importance of target market effects on the evaluation of both brand extension strategies. Findings support the idea that derived brand names leverage parent brand evaluations and protect parent brand from extension failures.
© 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The brand name is a very important brand element, and may heavily influence the way a brand performs, but marketing studies on brand names are not very common in major marketing journals. Most marketing textbooks do talk about brand names, but the discussion is short and very limited — normally a few pages in the product chapter.
However, in the human world, when a child is to be born, picking a name is for parents (creators) one of the most important and even troublesome decisions to be made. In the world of products and services, the task of naming challenges marketing people in a similar way. Branding experts recognize this reality: brand names are key brand equity generators because they affect recall and recognition, they carry meaning, and they even affect attitudes towards the brand
(Aaker, 1991; Keller, 2003; Schmitt, 1998). However, the brand name and brand name variations are not very present in the brand extension literature. Most brand extension studies to date assume that brand extensions use the full original parent brand name, for example, Oral B tooth brush may extend to Oral B dental floss or to Oral B mouth wash.
This assumption is reasonable, since one of the reasons for launching brand extensions is to use the equity of the brand in a new product category and to facilitate consumer acceptance and brand association transfer (Aaker, 1990; Aaker and Keller, 1990; Doyle, 1990; Smith and
Park, 1992; Erdem, 1998; Kirmani et al., 1999; Swaminathan et al.,
2001). Use of the full brand name on the extension may ease this process. Other companies, however, use a sub-branding strategy where they develop a different brand combined with the parent brand. For
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: sergio.olavarrieta@udp.cl (S. Olavarrieta), eduardot@unegocios.cl
(E. Torres), avasquez@panam.edu (A. Vásquez-Parraga), cbarra@unegocios.cl (C. Barra).

example: Ultra by BMW (Milberg et al., 1997), or Courtyard by
Marriott. Also, some firms pick just the initial letters or syllables of the parent brand name and combine them with category cues or names to create a derived brand name, for example, Nestea Iced Tea or Kodacolor films. In fact, one of the most known brand names in the world is a derived brand name: Nescafé.
Would you prefer to buy Nestle Tea or Nestea, Kodak color films or
Kodacolor films? Would derived brand naming strategies compared to full brand naming strategies affect consumer evaluations of brand extensions in a similar manner? Would the consequences be the same for Nestle if Nestea fails or if Nestle Tea fails? This paper examines the advantages of the derived brand name extension strategy compared to the full brand name extension strategy, an issue that is not very common in the brand extension literature.
Why do firms use derived or partial brand extensions instead of full brand extensions? When trying to answer this question, one may think of many possible answers. One answer may be convenience and practicality (you cannot have ultra-long names!). A second answer may be psychological appeal and effectiveness (probably partial names, abbreviations, or nick names such as CAT for Caterpillar generate different effects on the evaluations of brand extensions and parent brands?). This paper explores the second line of reasoning.
Based on existing literature, the main hypothesis is that derived brand naming strategies can be advantageous compared to traditional full name extension strategies. This paper addresses a second question.
Does a differential effect exist on brand extensions when parent brands target market consumers and non-target market consumers evaluate the extension? Brand researchers assume that brand extensions offer a way to stretch the brand with existing or target market consumers. However, brand extensions are also an alternative to attract consumers who do not use the original brand product, but who may try the extension product.

0148-2963/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.10.007 ٤٩

900

S. Olavarrieta et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 899–905

The first section of the paper includes a brief synthesis of the major findings of brand extension literature, particularly focusing on why derived brand extensions may work different than full brand extensions under certain circumstances. The second section includes research hypotheses following this theoretical examination. The third section presents the results of two experimental studies. Findings support the ideas that derived brand names may perform better than full name extensions when firms want to reduce the risk of negative feedback effects to the parent brand, or when they want to extend the brand to new target markets. The final section addresses implications for practice and research.

parent brand name Nes. Nes may also trigger other associations related to similar words, but not necessarily to the Nestle brand.
Because of the particular way consumers process sub-brands and sub-brand information the argument is that sub-branding strategies offer a successful way to reduce the negative feedback effects of failed extensions on the parent brand (Milberg et al., 1997). Derived brand names may share this feature, given that a similar subtypification process will be in place.
3. Research hypotheses
Several studies investigate the factors affecting consumer evaluations of brand extensions (see Bottomley and Holden (2001) and
Völckner and Sattler (2006) for recent summary studies). According to these studies, brand extension evaluations are positively affected by: product category fit; high perceived quality of the parent brand or parent brand's strength; difficulty for the manufacturer to make the extension; brand portfolio or success of previous extensions (Boush and Loken, 1991; Park et al., 1991; Keller and Aaker, 1992; Keller, 1993;
Broniarczyk and Alba, 1994; Klink and Smith, 2001). Among all of these studies, product category fit is the variable capturing most attention and the one included in the seminal work by Keller and
Aaker (1992). In addition, feedback effects or the effects of the extension on the parent brand name, is another key variable for understanding and assessing the total effects and the success or failure of brand extensions. This variable is very important also, because feedback effects may differ for derived extensions compared to full name extensions. Therefore, this research focuses on product fitness and feedback effects in order to understand the advantages and drawbacks of derived brand extensions. Further work might address the role of other factors such as perceived quality, brand portfolio characteristics, or specific product category associations.

2. Literature review: derived brand extensions
Despite the important number of studies addressing brand extensions, most of them focus on full name brand extensions.
Academics pay little attention to other types of naming strategies when launching brand extensions, like sub-branding or derived brand extensions. Some studies consider the sub-branding extension strategy (Milberg et al., 1997; Kirmani et al., 1999). Sub-brands involve the combining of the parent brand with a new and different brand, such as Ultra by BMW or Courtyard by Marriott.
In sub-branding then, consumers have the parent brand name as a cue, while companies introduce a new name. Consumers perceive these sub-brands differently as compared to those that sound totally new and unfamiliar. Consumers will create subcategories linked to the original brand name to save this new information (Sujan and Bettman,
1989). They follow a subtypification process, allowing for the original schema or categorization to be kept, but with an addendum: the sub category linked to the sub brand (Taylor, 1981).
Derived brand extensions relate but nevertheless are different from regular brand extensions because only a part of the parent's brand name appears in a derived brand extension Three different types of derived brand extensions are: a) the use of a part of a name combined with an identifier of the extension product category (e.g.
Nestea); b) the use of a part of the brand name combined with a general concept (e.g. Nesquick); and c) the nickname derived brand extension (CAT vs. Caterpillar or TED air shuttle services of UNITED).
The focus of this study will be on the two first types of derived brand extensions. Given that derived brand names use only a part of the original brand name, consumers need to process and accommodate this information in their category-based memories in a relatively more complex way (O'Sullivan and Durso, 1984; Taylor and Crocker, 1981;
Weber and Crocker, 1983). First, consumers need to be able to identify the derived brand and make the connection with the original brand name. This procedure resolves the incongruency between existing information in the consumer's memory (in connection with the original brand name) and new information (derived brand name). The new sub-category is now part of the concepts cognitive structure in the consumer's mind (Milberg et al., 1997). The derived extension now turns into a fixed association.
Therefore, the transfer of associations and attitudes from the parent brand to derived brand extensions is a complex process that involves three steps: 1) the consumer recognizes the brand name cue
(the partial name); 2) consumers resolve the incongruency between the original brand name and the new one, which includes a partial brand name with additional information (e.g. product category) leading to subtypification; 3) the transfer of associations and attitudes takes place.
Due to the particular characteristics of derived brand extensions, one may expect differences in the transfer process with regards to the actual associations. Consumers having Nes as a cue instead of the complete name Nestle do not retrieve the full range of associations the brand has. The argument is that the transference process to the brand extension includes only those Nestle associations related to the partial

3.1. Derived brand extensions and category fit
One definition of product category fit is the extent to which consumers perceive two products marketed under the same brand to be similar (Muthukrishnan and Weitz, 1991; Smith and Park, 1992).
Aaker and Keller (1990) conceptualize fit in terms of three dimensions: similarity of product categories, degree of substitution among product categories, and degree of complementarity among product categories
(original and extension product category). Even though similarity is only one of the dimensions of product fit, several researchers in the literature use similarity as a synonym for fit, and is the fit dimension most commonly present in previous studies. Product similarity facilitates recognition and affects transfer processes which trigger positive evaluations of brand extensions (Herr et al., 1996; Klink and
Smith, 2001). The higher the similarity between the original brand product and its extension, the easier consumers can link the latter with attitudes and associations related to the parent brand. This link between the original brand category and the extension category may increase through specific advertising and communication activities
(Bridges et al., 2000).
Although previous research exploring the effects of similarity on brand extension evaluations uses mainly full name extensions, the findings should hold as well for derived brand extensions. This prediction is because derived brands share a portion of the parent brand name, a portion that is recognizable by consumers. Product similarity will also act as an implicit cue to help consumers identify the parent brand. Brand manufacturers may encourage that association through other cognitive cues (logo design or brand colors). These ideas suggest that, although the transfer process may be not as strong as with full name extensions, the key finding of previous extension research indicating a positive effect of fit on brand extension evaluation should hold. Additionally, consumer evaluations may not differ between full name and derived brand extensions in terms of the overall effects.
٥٠

S. Olavarrieta et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 899–905

Hypothesis 1a: Perceived similarity between the parent brand and the brand extension categories affect positively brand extension evaluations. Hypothesis 1b: Perceived similarity between the parent brand and the brand extension categories affect positively derived brand extension evaluations. Hypothesis 1c: The effect of perceived similarity on brand extension category evaluations in the case of derived brand extensions is similar to full name extensions.
The branding literature shows that several factors may strengthen the transfer process between the parent brand and the extension: the type of brand specific associations (Aaker and Keller, 1990; Keller,
1993); the appropriateness of these associations for the extension
(Park et al., 1991; Keller, 1993; Broniarczyk and Alba, 1994; Milberg et al., 1997; Bridges et al., 2000); the relevance these associations have within the brand communication strategy (Keller, 1993; Bridges et al.,
2000); and the strength or importance of these associations in the parent brand's cognitive structure — in other words, its accessibility within the consumer mind (Bridges et al., 2000). These factors may be important, and will require further examination in future studies addressing derived brand extensions.
3.2. Feedback effects of the extension on the parent brand name
Brand extension success or failure may have an impact on the parent brand's equity. Several studies suggest the risk of brand dilution when brand extensions fail (Loken and John, 1993; Milberg et al., 1997; Gürhan-Canli and Maheswaran, 1998; Swaminathan et al.,
2001). Consistently, studies show that successful brand extensions have a positive impact on the parent brand (Keller and Aaker, 1992;
Morrin, 1999; Balachandear and Ghose, 2003). This effect might be even larger with increased similarity between the extension and original brand categories (Gürhan-Canli and Maheswaran, 1998).
A successful extension may benefit the parent brand by strengthening their favorable and distinctive associations (Dillon et al., 2001), improving buying intentions (Balachandear and Ghose, 2003) and incrementing market share (Swaminathan et al., 2001). Favorable experiences with the extension may generate strong beliefs in consumer minds which can transfer back to the parent brand
(Swaminathan et al., 2001). Extension failure directly affects consumer beliefs about specific attributes and overall qualities of the parent brand
(Loken and John, 1993; Kumar, 2005). This negative effect may occur because: 1) a low fit exists between the failed extension and the parent brand, and 2) the consumer builds inferences based on the new available information, and these inferences can reduce both trust, as well as the perceived quality of the parent brand (Milberg et al., 1997;
Keller and Aaker, 1992). Nevertheless, Milberg, Park, and McCarthy
(1997) propose and test the idea that marketers can neutralize this negative effect using sub-branding strategies.
Will these effects be the same for derived brand extensions compared to full-name extensions? Will the effects be symmetrical for brand extension failures and successes? Following subtypification literature (Sujan and Bettman, 1989), Milberg, Park, and McCarthy
(1997), suggest that a sub-branding line extension strategy provides cues for the consumer to create a sub-category for the sub-brand with all its associations. To a certain extent, this process isolates the parent brand from the failures or successes of the brand extension. Therefore feedback effects will be weaker. The hypothesis is that derived brand extensions trigger such a subtypification process, given that the brand extension is related, but different, from the original brand name.
Consumers may create a sub-category as with sub-brands or, in some cases, when they do not recognize the root of the derived brand name, they may create a completely different category, thus enhancing the isolation effect. Off course, this situation will be an extreme case, which will not benefit from the “liking” or “transfer” effect, explained earlier.
In any case, the expectation is that derived brand extensions produce weaker feedback effects on the parent brand compared to full name or traditional extensions, leading to the following hypotheses.

901

Hypothesis 2a: Brand extension failure has a lower negative effect on parent brand attitudes when using a derived brand extension strategy compared with a full name extension strategy. Hypothesis 2b: Brand extension success has a lower positive effect on parent brand attitudes when using a derived brand extension strategy compared with a full name extension strategy.
3.3. Derived extensions and target market effects
Despite the importance of the target market effect, brand researchers normally do not consider the incidence of consumer segments and targets in their investigations. This phenomenon may occur because researchers tend to implicitly assume that marketing strategies normally address particular target segments.
Previous marketing studies provide support for the idea that target market consumers possibly evaluate brand extensions differently compared to non-target market consumers (Kirmani et al., 1999; Park and Kim, 2001). These explanatory factors include the differential knowledge target-market consumers may possess (Muthukrishnan and Weitz, 1991), their relationship with the brand (Park and Kim,
2001), or basic love of the brand (Yeung and Wyer, 2005). According to Keller (1993), consumers have different brand-related knowledge structures which affect their reactions to brand names (particularly those that they already buy). This statement is basic and may explain why customers tend to evaluate in a better way those brand extensions attempting to target them. Different types of knowledge and experience influence the way consumers perceive marketing communication (Alba and Hutchinson, 1987) and the right communication can generate a closer relationship or bond with the brand (Yeung and Wyer, 2005).
This relationship with target consumers improves when satisfaction levels and investment levels increase through advertising and other marketing initiatives (McKenna, 1991, 1995). These integrated marketing communication efforts using consistent and coherent messages, promotional activities, media and brand identity elements, tend to produce a more positive attitude towards the brand (Reynolds and Gutman, 1984; see also Kliatchko, 2005; Pilotta et al., 2004; Naik and Raman, 2003). Some authors explain this effect based on the intense coordinated efforts marketers need to make in order to access the target market (Haynes et al., 1999). From a different theoretical perspective, Yeung and Wyer (2005) test the idea that preference may influence brand extension evaluations due to a love-type effect. They suggest that the preference consumers have for a brand supports the idea that target market consumers help develop a first impression of the brand extension as well as future judgements or assessments, and this effect happens regardless of other important extension characteristics such as category fit. The hypothesis in this study is that such love is stronger in target market consumers, which in turn suggests more positive evaluations of brand extensions.
These arguments are fine but, what would be the reaction of target market consumers of derived brand extensions compared to full name extensions? McEnally and de Chernatony (1999) indicate that selective perception attention and memory retention processes may produce higher learning of brand knowledge and improved message comprehension. Therefore, a consistent thought is that target market consumers (of the parent brand) may recognize the relationship between the derived brand and the parent brand more easily than other consumers. This recognition makes association easier and affects the transfer, but full name brand extensions compared to derived brands have an advantage in terms of recognition as well as in the subsequent transfer process. However, the use of derived brand names can be seen as a form of brand renewal. New uses for the brand come into play, transforming a little the brand name element as well as adding freshness to the brand image. The use of derived brand names may also protect the extension from unhelpful associations. As suggested by Keller (2003 p.661–662), “shortened names or initials
٥١

S. Olavarrieta et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 899–905

902

Table 1
Parent brands, original (parent) and extension categories, and derived brand names.

4.2. Experimental studies

Brand

Original product Proposed extension category product category

Product
Derived
similarity brand name

Sodimac

Homecenter

Low

Soditec

High
Low
High

Sodiclothe
Pepsofeet
Peplips

In order to test the hypotheses, researchers conduct two experiments. They use a 2 × 2 experiment with product similarity (high or low) and extension naming strategy (full or derived) as the two independent variables. They also design a second experiment to test feedback effects on the parent brand. This second 2 × 2 study includes degree of extension success (high or low) and extension naming strategy as the experimental variables. The following section presents a more detailed description of the experiments and their results.

Pepsodent Toothpaste

Technical educational institute Work footwear and uniforms
Foot powder
Lip balm

can also disguise potentially negative product associations”. Or companies can adapt (shorten) brands to show connection with customers, as when Federal Express changed its name to Fed Ex consistent with the way clients refer to the company.
Therefore, this renewal factor may offset the reduced recognition effect, and help target consumers on average to have similar evaluations of derived and full name brand extensions. Hypothesis 3a: Target market consumers evaluate derived brand extensions and full name brand extensions in a similar way.
Nevertheless, for those consumers not included in the target segments of a particular brand, the use of the derived brand name strategy may affect the evaluation of the brand extension. Since nontarget market consumers have simpler or even emptier brand cognitive structures, they will consider a new derived brand as a completely new brand name. Therefore no subtypification process may happen. In this scenario, full name extensions have an advantage because they become known by a portion of non-target consumers
(large or small, depending on the advertising intensity of that industry), thus providing them with a weak but positive quality signal.
Particularly, full name brand extensions may leverage both weak associations and brand awareness in general, even among non-users and non-target segments.
The expectation is for this leverage to translate into a better evaluation of full name extensions compared to derived extensions in the case of non-target consumers. Hypothesis 3b: Consumers not belonging to the target market of the parent brand evaluate full name extensions better than derived brand extensions.

4.3. Study 1: product similarity and target market effects
The research design includes a 2 × 2 fixed factors factorial design, with two experimental variables: (1) product category similarity
(high or low), and (2) full name or derived extension. The study uses a sample of 124 subjects. They are all business students participating for extra credit (59% male and 41% female). Subjects first need to provide an evaluation of their attitudes towards the parent brand names
(Sodimac and Pepsodent). Researchers tell them that these brands are launching new brand extensions (similar or dissimilar) in the marketplace. Subjects receive the new names (full name or derived name) of these products, and with no further information, they report their evaluations of these new extensions. Subjects receive treatments according to a random assignation process.
Study subjects report their attitudes towards the brand and the brand extensions using a 3-item instrument. The measurement instrument inquires subjects about the global attitude towards the brand and extension (Aaker and Keller, 1990; Desai and Keller, 2002); its attractiveness (Kirmani et al., 1999); and the prospective attitude towards the brand and extension (Martin and Stewart, 2001). The instrument uses a 7-point Likert scale. Cronbach's alphas are 0.88 for attitude towards the parent brand and 0.87 for attitude towards the extension. 4.4. Study 1 results
To test hypothesis H1a, the analysis include a one-way ANOVA on the total sample, with product similarity as the independent variable.
Similar extensions reach an average attitude score of 4.7 and dissimilar extensions reach 3.8 (F = 34.10 con p = 0.000), thus supporting H1a — the positive effect of product fit on brand extension evaluation.
Furthermore, in order to test hypotheses H1b and H1c, separate one-way ANOVAs to two half samples are performed: full brand name and derived brand name subsamples. In both cases product similarity is the independent factor, finding significant differences in the predicted direction. In the full brand name extension sample, similar extensions get an average of 4.8 and dissimilar extensions get 3.9
(F = 12.92; p = 0.000). In the derived brand name subsample, similar extensions get an average of 4.7 and 3.6 for dissimilar extensions
(F = 20.81; p = 0.000), thus supporting H1b, that product fit will positively affect brand extension evaluation in the case of derived brand extensions. The similar results in both scenarios provide support for H1c, indicating no differences in effects due to product similarity in full name or derived name branding strategies (Table 2).
Table 3 shows the average individual scores for the different treatment conditions. In general they are consistent with previous

4. Method
The research method includes a first stage to select brands and extensions and a second stage with two experimental studies to test the hypotheses.
4.1. Preselection of brands
A focus group approach helps the process of selecting the brands, brand extension categories, and derived brand names for the study.
Twelve business students belonging to the same segment as the final study subjects participate in the focus group. The brands have to be known in the marketplace, have a perceived high quality, and do not have a broad existing extension portfolio (Aaker and Keller, 1990).
Selected derived brand names need to be recognizable by consumers and possible to link to the original brand name. The two potential brand extension categories for each brand have to be: 1) possible to make by the manufacturer of the parent brand, and 2) one similar and the other dissimilar to the original product category. Focus group participants select brands by consensus. See Table 1 for the preselection results.
In order to find out if college students are or are not part of the brand's target markets, a second group of 30 college students is surveyed. They report whether they think these brands sell products targeting their needs. As expected, they consider Pepsodent (the dental care brand) to be a relevant brand, and Sodimac (Homecenter) as a brand not targeting college students' needs (average scores: 5.6 for Pepsodent and 3.8 for Sodimac in a 7 point Likert scale; F = 10,8 p = 0.003 b 0.01; Cronbach's alphas greater than 0.90).

Table 2
Study 1: average mean scores (standard deviations) and one-way ANOVA analysis.
Similar category Dissimilar category F
Total sample
4.7 (1.33)
Derived brand 4.7 (1.38)
Full brand
4.8 (1.30)

٥٢

3.8 (1.36)
3.6 (1.33)
3.9 (1.38)

P

Hypothesis

34.10 0.000 H1a supported
20.81 0.000 H1b supported
12.92 0.000 H1c supported

S. Olavarrieta et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 899–905
Table 3
Study 1: Attitude towards the brand extension mean scores (standard deviations) by brand name.
Sodimac (not target market)
Full brand
Derived brand

Dissimilar

Similar

4.7 (1.02)
3.8 (0.99)

4.4 (1.36)
5.1 (1.23)

Full brand

Dissimilar

5.1 (1.17)
4.2 (1.37)

Table 5
Study 2: average mean scores (standard deviations) and one-way ANOVA analysis.

Pepsodent (target market)

Similar

903

Derived brand

F

p

Hypothesis

4.8 (0.90)
5.3 (0.84)

5.4 (0.88)
5.5 (0.90)

15.61
0.55

0.000
0.461

H2a supported
H2b not supported

3.1 (1.23)
3.3 (1.57)

Extension failure
Extension success

include the four initial letters (Sodi) or three initial letters (Pep) of the original brand combined with a word referring to the extension product category. These combination words were English or Englishsounding names. This choice is consistent with existing marketing practices in Latin American countries, and with previous research on foreign branding effects, which indicate that English-sounding brand names (in the case of Spanish speaking countries) have better evaluations than Spanish-sounding brand names (LeClerc et al.,
1994; Olavarrieta et al., 2001).
A new group of 105 business students participate in this study.
They are told they would be part of a general brand perception research. Before answering the survey, subjects from each of the four groups receive information about a particular situation regarding the specific extension product category and the brand name used to market the product in each case. Then, researchers inform the subjects about the degree of success or failure of the extensions, and the general reasons for this failure. After subjects receive this information, they give their evaluation of the parent brand. Researchers assign students randomly to each treatment group. As in Study 1, the dependent variable, subjects report their attitude towards the parent brand, using a 7-item Likert type scale.

findings. In both parent brand cases, similar extensions perform better than dissimilar extensions. Product category similarity generates statistically significant effects on both brand scenarios (Sodimac,
F = 3.76 [0.055]); Pepsodent, F = 47.23 [0.000]), thus providing further support for H1a (see Table 3).
A closer examination of Tables 3 and 4 allows us to test the target market effect. The F-tests for the branding strategy treatment are significant in both brand scenarios (Sodimac, F = 17.20 [0.000];
Pepsodent, F = 4.17 [0.043]). However, the effects of extension naming strategies in each brand scenario are different (see Table 3). In the case of dental care (Pepsodent-target scenario), the derived brand extension generates a better result. This result does not support H3a which predicted similar evaluations in both extension branding scenarios. In the case of Homecenter (non-target scenario), full name or traditional extensions produce better consumer evaluations of brand extensions as hypothesized in H3b. A more detailed examination of the mean scores in Table 1 may suggest a partial interaction effect between product category similarity and naming strategy. When subjects are a target market for a brand, no differences are found in attitudes towards extensions of dissimilar categories. In the case of extensions in similar categories, however, subjects prefer the shorter or derived form. This preference is an interesting result, suggesting that customers appreciate the use of nicknames, as with people, because they convey information in a more efficient way (signaling theory), or maybe reflecting familiarity and affiliation with a communal reality (emotional and motivational theories). Despite the previous reasoning, research found no significant effects of interaction between product similarity and type of extension naming strategy (Sodimac F = 0.09 p = 0.762 and
Pepsodent F = 0.45 con p = 0.505) in the total sample. Further research may examine this issue.

4.6. Study 2 results
To test hypotheses H2a and H2b, researchers run one-way ANOVAs with extension naming strategy as the independent factor for failure only and success only subsamples. A significant and positive effect on attitude towards the parent brand when using the derived brand strategy (F = 15.61, [p = 0.000]) is found for the failure only subsample.
The average attitude towards the parent brand scores for the traditional or full brand name strategy is 4.8, and for the derived brand name strategy is 5.4, thus providing further support for H2a
(Table 5).
In the success only sample, no significant differences (F = 0.55, p = 0.461) can be found between the use of full brand (mean score
AttParent Brand = 5.3) or derived brand extension naming strategies
(mean score AttParent Brand = 5.5), thus not supporting H2b.
Table 6 provides further insights regarding the effects of derived brand names. Table 6 shows that derived brand extensions do less harm to parent brands (i.e. the mean scores were higher) in the case of extension failures, and in the case of extension success, results are very similar among both extension naming strategies (use of the full brand name or derived brand name), thus confirming the buffer effect of derived brand names.
Table 7 provides statistical support for the previous analysis showing significant effects for the type of extension naming strategy in both brand scenarios: Sodimac (F = 5.86; 0.017), and Pepsodent
(F = 3.81; 0.054). This result confirms the idea that the extension

4.5. Study 2: derived brand extensions and feedback effects
This study tests hypotheses H2a and H2b addressing feedback or reciprocal effects of different extension naming strategies. A key hypothesis is that one major advantage of derived extensions is that reciprocal effects are less intense with their use. The study includes brands and extensions selected in a pre-test (see Study 1).
In this study, researchers perform a new 2 × 2 fixed factors design, having: a) degree of extension success (Successful or Failed), and 2) extension naming strategy (full name or derived name) as independent variables. The study includes the following brands, extension product categories, and extension names: a) Sodimac, work footwear and uniforms (Sodiclothe) and technical institute (Soditec); and b)
Pepsodent, moisturizer lipstick (Peplips) and foot care powder
(PepFeet). The derived brand names (identified in the focus group)

Table 4
Study 1: F-values and p-levels by brand name.
Sodimac
extension
(non target market)
F
Product category similarity
Naming strategy (full vs. derived)
Similarity × naming strategy

p

F

p

3.76
17.20
0.09

0.055
0.000
0.762

47.23
4.17
0.45

Table 6
Study 2: average mean scores (standard deviations) of different treatment conditions.

Pepsodent extension (target market)
0.000
0.043
0.505

Sodimac homecenter
(non target brand)
Full brand
Extension failure
Extension success

٥٣

Pepsodent toothpaste
(target brand)

Derived brand

Full brand

Derived brand

4.6 (0.91)
5.1 (0.65)

5.2 (0.79)
5.3 (0.60)

5.0 (0.86)
5.6 (0.97)

5.6 (0.92)
5.6 (1.12)

S. Olavarrieta et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 899–905

904

Future research can also address the association transfer process.
The results of this paper focus on general attitudes towards extensions and parent brands, but not on specific or general associations, and how these associations transfer (or not) to derived brand extensions.
This investigation can be very important for uncovering the underlying mechanisms and processes behind the conclusions of this paper.

Table 7
Study 2: F-values and p-levels.
Sodimac
(non target brand)
F
Extension naming strategy
Extension success
Name × extension success

Pepsodent
(target brand)

p

F

p

5.86
3.89
1.37

0.017
0.051
0.244

3.81
2.47
2.09

0.054
0.119
0.151

References
Aaker David A. Brand extensions: the good, the bad and the ugly. Sloan Manage Rev
1990;31(4):47–56.
Aaker DA. Managing brand equity. New York, NY: The Free Press; 1991.
Aaker David A, Keller Kevin L. Consumer evaluation of brand extensions. J Mark 1990;54
(1):27–41.
Alba Joseph W, Hutchinson J Wesley. Dimensions of consumer expertise. J Consum Res
1987;13(4):411–54.
Balachandear Subramian, Ghose Sanjoy. Reciprocal spillover effects: a strategic benefit of brand extensions. J Mark 2003;67(1):4-13.
Bottomley Paul A, Holden Stephen JS. Do we really know how consumers evaluate brand extensions? Empirical generalizations based on secondary analysis of eight studies. J Mark Res 2001;38(4):494–500.
Boush David M, Loken Barbara. A process tracing study of brand extension evaluation.
J Mark Res 1991;28(1):16–28.
Bridges Sheri, Keller Kevin L, Sood Sanjay. Communication strategies for brand extensions: enhancing perceived fit by establishing explanatory links. J Advert
2000;29(4):1-11.
Broniarczyk Susan M, Alba Joseph W. The importance of the brand in brand extension.
J Mark Res 1994;31(2):214–28.
Desai Kalpesh K, Keller Kevin L. The effects of ingredient branding strategies on host brand extendibility. J Mark 2002;66(1):73–93.
Dillon William R, Madden Thomas J, Kirmani Amna, Mukherjee Soumen. Understanding whats in a brand rating: a model for assessing brand and attribute effects and their relationship to brand equity. J Mark Res 2001;38(4):415–29.
Doyle Peter. Building successful brands: the strategic options. J Consum Mark 1990;7
(2):5-20.
Erdem Tülin. An empirical analysis of umbrella branding. J Mark Res 1998;35(3):339–51.
Gürhan-Canli Zeynep, Maheswaran Durairaj. The effects of extensions on brand name dilution and enhancement. J Mark Res 1998;35(4):434–73.
Haynes Andy, Lackman Conway, Guskey Audrey. Comprehensive brand presentation: ensuring consistent brand image. J Prod Brand Manag 1999;8(4):286–300.
Herr Paul, Farquhar Peter H, Fazio Russell H. Impact of dominance and relatedness on brand extensions. J Consum Psychol 1996;5(2):135–59.
Keller Kevin L. Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. J Mark 1993;57(1):1-22.
Keller Kevin L. Strategic brand management: building, measuring and managing brand equity. Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2003.
Keller Kevin L, Aaker David A. The effects of sequential introduction of brand extensions.
J Mark Res 1992;29:35–50.
Kirmani Amna, Sood Sanjay, Bridges Sheri. The ownership effect in consumer responses to brand line stretches. J Mark 1999;63(1):88-101.
Kliatchko Jerry. Towards a new definition of integrated marketing communications
(IMC). Int J Advert 2005;24(1):7-34.
Klink Richard R, Smith Daniel C. Threats to the external validity of brand extensions research. J Mark Res 2001;38(3):326–35.
Kumar Piyush. Brand counterextensions: the impact of brand extension success versus failure. J Mark Res 2005;42(2):183–94.
LeClerc France, Schmitt Bernd H, Dubé Laurette. Foreign branding and its effects on product perceptions and evaluations. J Mark Res 1994;23(2):263–70.
Loken Barbara, John Deborah R. Diluting brand beliefs: when do brand extensions have a negative impact? J Mark 1993;57(3):71–84.
Martin Ingrid M, Stewart David W. The differential impact of goal congruency on attitudes, intentions, and the transfer of brand equity. J Mark Res 2001;38(4):471–84.
McEnally Martha R, de Chernatony Leslie. The evolving nature of branding: consumer and managerial considerations. Acad Mark Sci Rev 1999;99(2):1-38.
McKenna Regis. Relationship marketing: successful strategies for the age of the customer.
Reading, Massachusetts, USA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company; 1991.
McKenna Regis. Real-time marketing. Harvard Bus Rev 1995;73(4):87–95.
Milberg Sandra, Park C Whan, McCarthy Michael S. Managing negative feedback effects associated with brand extensions: the impact of alternative branding strategies.
J Consum Psychol 1997;6(2):119–40.
Morrin Maureen. The impact of brand extensions on parent brand memory structures and retrieval processes. J Mark Res 1999;36(4):517–25.
Muthukrishnan AV, Weitz Barton A. Role of product knowledge in evaluation of brand extension. Adv Consum Res 1991;18(1):407–13.
Naik Prasad A, Raman Kalyan. Understanding the impact on synergy in multimedia communications. J Mark Res 2003;40(4):375–88.
Olavarrieta Sergio, Lillo Sandra, Patuelli Carlos. What is best: French, English, or
Spanish? Examining the relationship between language and consumer brand evaluations. Developments in Marketing Science, Proceedings of the Academy of
Marketing Science Annual Conference, San Diego; 2001.
O'Sullivan Chris S, Durso Francis T. Effect of schema-incongruent information on memory for stereotypical attributes. J Pers Soc Psychol 1984;47(1):55–70.
Park Jong-Won, Kim Kyeong-Heui. Role of consumer relationship with a brand in brand extensions: some exploratory findings. Adv Consum Res 2001;28(1):179–85.

naming strategy does matter, affecting parent brand evaluations. In particular, derived brand extensions represent an interesting strategy to isolate the parent brand from the risks of extensions failures and feedback effects.
H2a receives support. H2b, however, which suggests that a symmetrical effect may happen for positive scenarios or successes, is not supported. In the scenario of brand extension success, derived brand extensions have similar mean scores compared to full name extensions, rejecting H2b.
These results represent important evidence in favor of the use of derived brand naming strategies, because they provide all the benefits of preference transfer or parent brand enhancement when extensions do succeed, and they serve as a buffer when extensions fail. Furthermore, the results suggest that derived brand names can capitalize more (better parent brand evaluations) than the traditional full name strategy. This result needs further investigation in the future.
5. Implications and general discussion
This study focuses on derived brand extensions, a particular type of extension that uses partial names derived from the original brand name (e.g. Nestea, or Peplips). Consistent with previous literature, this paper provides evidence supporting the general hypothesis that product similarity affects positively the evaluation of derived extensions. Therefore, product category similarity, one of the key fit dimensions, has similar effects on the evaluation of derived brand extensions and full name extensions. More interestingly, the study provides evidence in favor of the subtypification theory, a branch of the categorization theory widely used in branding research (Park et al., 1989; Milberg et al., 1997). Derived brand extensions might be a safer way to extend brands, because they seem to be isolated from extension failures, but at the same time they allow extensions to benefit from parent brand associations, and to transfer successes back to parent brands.
The exact way this isolation process and positive feedback effect work, will require further empirical and theoretical work. Variety seeking, novelty effects, and sensorial stimulation might be possible areas in which to find deeper explanations.
In another interesting finding, the study accentuates the importance of the somewhat overlooked target market effect. Target market consumers do evaluate brand extensions differently than non-target consumers, and the best strategies may differ in terms of their focus: old, loyal, original parent brand target market consumers, or new ones. These results are important for both future study design and for managerial implications. Checking the target market status of research subjects might be an important procedure for assuring results validity and comparability.
Although these results need further testing with new samples and different brands and product categories, they show interesting results.
A better understanding is required from new studies in order to explain why derived brand extensions and full name extensions capitalize similarly on extension successes. In addition, why target market consumers seem to like derived brand extensions, or nickname brands, better than full name extensions is another stream of research that is important not just for brand extension literature but for the whole area of branding.
٥٤

S. Olavarrieta et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 899–905
Park C Whan, Lawson Robert, Milberg Sandra. Memory structure of brand names. Adv
Consum Res 1989;16(1):726–31.
Park C Whan, Milberg Sandra, Lawson Robert. Evaluation of brand extensions: the role of product feature similarity and concept consistency. J Consum Res 1991;18
(2):185–93.
Pilotta Joseph J, Schultz Don E, Drenik Gary, Rist Phillip. Simultaneous media usage: a critical consumer orientation to media planning. J Consum Behav 2004;3(3):16–26.
Reynolds Thomas J, Gutman Jonathan. Advertising is image management. J Advert Res
1984;24(1):27–38.
Schmitt Bernd. Experiential marketing: how to get customers to sense, feel, think, act and relate to your company and brand. New York, NY: The Free Press; 1998.
Smith Daniel C, Park C Whan. The effects of brand extensions on market share and advertising efficiency. J Mark Res 1992;29(3):296–313.
Sujan Mita, Bettman James R. The effects of brand positioning: strategies on consumers brand and category perceptions: some inside on schema research. J Mark Res
1989;26(4):454–67.

905

Swaminathan Vanitha, Fox Richard J, Reddy Srinivas K. The impact of brand extension introduction on choice. J Mark 2001;65(4):1-15.
Taylor Shelly E. A categorization approach to stereotyping. In: Hamilton DL, editor.
Cognitive processes in stereotyping and inter-group behavior. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum; 1981. p. 83-114.
Taylor Shelly E, Crocker Jennifer. Schematic bases of social information processing.
Social cognition: the Ontario symposium; 1981. p. 89-134.
Völckner Franziska, Sattler Henrik. Drivers of brand extension success. J Mark 2006;70
(2):18–34.
Weber Reneé, Crocker Jennifer. Cognitive processes in revision of stereotypic beliefs.
J Pers Soc Psychol 1983;45(5):961–77.
Yeung Catherine W, Wyer Jr Robert S. Does loving a brand mean loving its products? The role of brand-elicited affect in brand extension evaluations. J Mark Res 2005;42
(4):495–506.

٥٥

:2 ‫ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺖ‬

Brand extension feedback: The role of advertising

Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 305–313

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Business Research

Brand extension feedback: The role of advertising ☆
Eva Martínez a,⁎, Teresa Montaner b,1, José M. Pina a,2 a b

Departamento de Economía y Dirección de Empresas, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Gran Vía 2, Zaragoza 50005, Spain
Departamento de Economía y Dirección de Empresas, Escuela Universitaria de Estudios Empresariales, María de Luna S/N Edificio Lorenzo Normante, Zaragoza 50018, Spain

ARTICLE

INFO

Article history:
Received 1 May 2007
Received in revised form 1 February 2008
Accepted 1 May 2008
Keywords:
Brand extensions
Brand image
Brand equity
Advertising

ABSTRACT
Firms often use brand extensions as a way of introducing their new products, although they also risk diluting their brand image. In order to understand how consumers assess extensions and extended brands, the present work proposes and estimates a theoretical model, using the structural equation methodology. The results of the estimation indicate that the attitude towards the extension influences brand image and that this attitude is a consequence of the initial brand beliefs and the coherence of the new product. A multisample analysis also reveals that favoring the introduction of extensions through adequate advertising constitutes an efficient way of protecting brand image.
© 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Launching new products is a business activity with high risks and costs. As success rates are usually below 50% (Taylor and Bearden,
2003), firms often resort to brand extension strategies, in an attempt to make their new offers more attractive for consumers and distributors.
Brand extensions involve using the name of an existing brand to introduce new product categories (Aaker and Keller, 1990) and leveraging the brand equity developed in traditional markets
(Balachander and Ghose, 2003; Farquhar, 1989). As well as stimulating demand, equity transfer from the original brand to the extension avoids the high costs of developing and communicating a new brand name (Aaker and Keller, 1990; Milewicz and Herbig, 1994). These and other advantages may explain why extensions are one of the commonest strategies among marketing managers (Völckner and
Sattler, 2006).
Analyzing the transfer of associations between the brand and the new extension is essential when considering the success or failure of an extension strategy. The consumer mentally interchanges his

☆ The authors thank the following sources for their financial help: CICYT (Ref: SEJ200502315) and Government of Aragon (“GENERES”, Ref.S-09; “PM0262/2006”).
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 976 762713; fax: +34 976 761767.
E-mail addresses: emartine@unizar.es (E. Martínez), montagut@unizar.es
(T. Montaner), jmpina@unizar.es (J.M. Pina).
1
Tel.: +34 976 761000x4943; fax: +34 976 762740.
2
Tel.: +34 976 761000x4693; fax: +34 976 761767.
0148-2963/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.05.009 ٥٧

knowledge and affection for the brand and the extended category
(Czellar, 2003; Keller, 2003) generating changes in the brand image and its positioning (Martínez and de Chernatony, 2004; Park et al.,
1986). Most researchers have focused on the “forward effect” or transference of associations from the parent brand to the extension
(Aaker and Keller, 1990; Balachander and Ghose, 2003; Czellar, 2003).
However, the “feedback” or “backward effect” from the new category to the extended brand equally deserves the attention of researchers
(Balachander and Ghose, 2003), since it can cause the dilution of established brand associations (Desai and Hoyer, 1993).
To avoid undesired results, firms can use various marketing actions, such as advertising campaigns, which can improve consumer assessment of the new product (Reddy et al., 1994; Taylor and
Bearden, 2003) and, therefore, of the brand (Balachander and Ghose,
2003; Sheinin, 1998).
For all the reasons above, it is of great interest to analyze the reciprocal transfer of associations between product brands and brand extensions. The present research proposes and estimates a theoretical model which explains the assessment of extensions and the subsequent effects on brand image, considering the moderating role of advertising. Previous research analyzes the effects of brand equity leveraging and feedback as independent phenomena. This study proposes a comprehensive model that considers the process as a whole. Moreover, it extends previous findings by showing how commercial ads are able to attract consumers' attention to the initial brand image in order to evaluate the new product.
Having outlined the motivation behind this article, the following sections contain a brief review of the literature to justify the hypotheses that shape a theoretical model. The next part describes

306

E. Martínez et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 305–313

The theory of hierarchy of effects is useful for studying the influence of advertising on the consumer behavior toward brand extensions. According to this theory, the first goal of advertising is not to sell but to enhance brand awareness and brand beliefs by communicating the existence of the brand and informing consumers of its attributes. If the company can achieve this goal, consumers will be more likely to try the brand or remain loyal (Deighton et al., 1994;
Vakratsas and Ambler, 1999). In general, recent research lends credence to this theory by demonstrating that advertising enhances brand knowledge (Karaosmanoglu and Melewar, 2006; Villarejo and
Sánchez, 2005) and, later on, purchase intentions (Crane, 1990;
MacKenzie et al., 1986). Chen and Liu's (2004) findings show that advertising, rather than sales promotion, encourages consumers to try brand extensions, even in the case of line extensions that belong to the same product category. Moreover, Smith and Park (1992) show that brand extensions increase the advertising efficiency since the communication effort addressed to an only product stimulates the demand for all the products affiliated with the same brand.
As well as considering hierarchy of effects, researchers heavily draw on Dual Mediation Hypothesis (DMH) to examine the effects of communications on consumer attitudes (e.g., Karson and Fisher, 2005;
MacKenzie et al., 1986; Petty and Cacioppo, 1981). As suggested in the
Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty and Cacioppo, 1981), the DMH proposes that the effects of persuasive communications can follow either a central or peripheral route. On the one hand, the central route assumes that individuals focus on the message content and develop brand cognitions that mediate the effect of the attitude toward the ad on the attitude toward the brand. On the other hand, the peripheral route suggests a direct link between attitude toward the ad and attitude toward the brand, since individuals will devote their attention to contextual cues (music, ad's visual elements, etc.). Focusing on brand extensions, Lane (2000) analyzes the effect of communicating repeatedly either peripheral associations, such as the label and package, or central associations like the brand benefits. For moderately incongruent extensions, Lane's (2000) results indicate that both peripheral and central brand associations positively influence both extension attitude and perceived fit. Nevertheless, for highly incongruent extensions, the only effective strategy is to evoke benefit brand associations (central route).

the methodology and the results regarding the model estimation.
Then, the paper ends with the conclusions and implications for researchers and practitioners alike.
2. Brand extensions and advertising
Researchers have widely studied brand extension strategy since the pioneering work of Boush et al. (1987). Most of the prior research has studied how consumers evaluate brand extensions (e.g., Aaker and
Keller, 1990; van Riel et al. 2001; Völckner and Sattler, 2006) and, more recently, the feedback effects on the extended brand (e.g., John et al.,
1998; Martínez and de Chernatony, 2004). In order to predict both brand extension acceptance and feedback effects, academics mainly rely on categorization theory and theories of schema-triggered effects
(Loken and John, 1993 Park et al. 1993 Thorbjørnsen, 2005).
According to the associative network theory, the consumer mind contains a network of concepts (nodes) interconnected through linkages or associations (Anderson, 1983; Morrin, 1999). When consumers associate the brand to a new product, they re-adapt their cognitive structure to accommodate or assimilate the new associations
(Park et al., 1993). This process depends on the degree of fit between the extended category and the person's existing mental schema
(Czellar, 2003; Loken and John, 1993). Assimilation will thus occur when a high degree of fit exists, and the existing schema remains essentially unchanged. On the other hand, a low perceived fit will lead to an accommodation of the new associations by changing the cognitive scheme (Park et al., 1993). Although book-keeping models explain that the new associations will always affect the preexisting ones, extensions that significantly deviate from the parent brand might create a separate cognitive category or sub-type (Gürhan-Canli and
Maheswaran, 1998; Loken and John, 1993; Weber and Crocker, 1983).
Determining the type of associations that consumers have in their mind is particularly important for extension success. Rangaswamy et al.
(1993) posit that those brands whose utility stems from intangible or symbolic attributes generate associations to new categories more easily because they are easier to stretch compared to brands relating to functional or tangible attributes. Moreover, intangible associations are more resistant to negative spillover effects on the extended brand image
(Diamantopoulos et al., 2005; Loken and John, 1993). With respect to specific brand associations, some authors prove that consumer attitude is highly dependant on perceptions about quality (Aaker and Keller,
1990; van Riel et al., 2001) and brand breadth (Boush and Loken, 1991;
Dacin and Smith, 1994). On the other hand, extension associations like perceived difficulty in manufacturing (Aaker and Keller, 1990) and product category (Bristol, 1996; Schmitt and Dubé, 1992) are also key variables influencing the extension success (for reviews, see Czellar,
2003; Grime et al., 2002; Völckner and Sattler, 2006).
As well as identifying the nature of associations, the brand extension literature reveals some factors that influence the degree of strength between such associations and the mental concepts or nodes.
For example, parent brand experience improves the brand extension evaluation (Swaminathan et al., 2001; Swaminathan, 2003) and avoids the risk of brand image dilution (Alexander and Colgate, 2005;
Swaminathan, 2003). This positive effect can be due to the fact that brand experience will increase the strength of brand associations and, therefore, the probability of recovering them in a purchase situation.
One variable that companies can control to manage their brand associations is advertising. In general, the impact of communications on the attitude toward brand extensions and the extended brands will depend both on the accumulated investment amount and the kind of messages communicated to the outside. Regarding the first issue, several authors verify that advertising effort positively relates to brand extension success (Nijssen, 1999; Taylor and Bearden, 2003). In relation to the second matter, companies may apply different communication strategies to increase perceived fit and, consequently, consumer acceptance (Aaker and Keller, 1990; Bridges et al., 2000).

3. Conceptual framework and hypotheses
In order to minimize potential negative effects of brand extensions on the current associations, it is necessary to understand the process of brand associations leveraging and feedback effects. To date, the literature has mainly focused either on brand extension evaluation or on spillover effects. The analysis of this process as a whole deserves higher attention.
The essence of extension strategies lies in capturing brand equity
(Balachander and Ghose, 2003; John et al., 1998). From a consumer perspective, researchers regard brand equity as a multidimensional concept which reflects the added value with which the brand endows the product (Aaker, 1996; Farquhar, 1989). Brand awareness, brand image and brand loyalty are some of the most commonly cited dimensions (Aaker, 1996; Pappu et al., 2005), and according to the models defined by some authors (Korchia, 2004; Na et al., 1999) some causal relations act as a link between them. Aaker (1996) adds perceived quality to his concept of brand equity, although this author admits that brand image also includes associations related to the performance of products. Consequently, the article hereon focuses on brand awareness, brand image and brand loyalty as the main factors making up brand equity. Other researchers also find it more interesting to analyze these dimensions separately (e.g., Park and Kim, 2001;
Völckner and Sattler, 2006) instead of considering a higher-level construct. The individual effect of brand equity on the attitude toward brand extensions may differ depending on the dimension analyzed.

٥٨

E. Martínez et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 305–313

307

to purchase the brand increases the intention to buy its extensions
(Hem and Iversen, 2003). Hence:

Brand knowledge, which gathers the dimensions of brand awareness and brand image, constitutes the essence of customerbased brand equity (Keller, 1993). The first dimension, brand awareness, deals with the ability of people to recognize and recall that a brand offers a certain product category (Aaker, 1991; Keller,
1993). The second one, brand image, refers to the different perceptions that consumers hold in their mind (Keller, 1993) which result from communicating the brand identity to the market (Kapferer, 2004;
Stern, Zinkhan, and Jaju, 2001). The literature empirically confirms that familiar brands, better known by consumers, generate a better brand image (Lemmink et al., 2003; Low and Lamb, 2000). This may be due to the “halo effect” by which individuals generalize their impressions on known attributes (Reynolds, 1965), thus developing more complete knowledge structures (Grime et al., 2002).
The third brand equity dimension, brand loyalty, implies a longterm commitment to repurchase involving both repeated patronage and favorable attitudes (Dick and Basu, 1994; Jacoby and Chestnut,
1978). Brand loyalty arises from positive brand perceptions and affection (Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2002; Jacoby and Chestnut, 1978;
Yoo et al., 2000). The empirical evidence thus suggests a sequence of effects between brand awareness, brand image and brand loyalty. This sequence is also consistent with the cognitive–affective–conative structure (Azjen and Fishbein, 1980) and the advertising theory of hierarchy of effects (Deighton et al., 1994). Therefore, the first two hypotheses state:

H5. Brand loyalty has a direct positive influence on brand extension attitude. Perceived fit is undoubtedly the most cited success factor in the research on brand extensions. Generally, the feelings that consumers associate to the brand and product category lead to an affective fit
(e.g., Barone, Miniard, and Romeo, 2000; Boush and Loken, 1991), whereas the specific associations underlying the brand/category knowledge evoke a cognitive fit (Keller, 1993). Cognitive fit, in turn, measures the perceived similarity between the new category and the extended one, or, alternatively, between the new category and the parent brand image (Bhat and Reddy, 2001; Czellar, 2003; Grime et al.,
2002). This latter approach, called “image fit” is more important (Bhat and Reddy, 2001), since the brand's core associations form the major reference to assess the extension (Kim, 2003). As a matter of fact, image fit also considers product attributes, which are one type of brand associations (Aaker, 1991).
The initial associations of a brand may condition perceived image fit. More favorable perceptions increase the extension's credibility (de
Ruyter and Wetzels, 2000) and, consequently, the coherence with the parent brand (Czellar, 2003). Park et al. (1991) point out that brand concept consistency is higher for prestige brands than for functional brands because prestige is easier to generalize to new products. On the other hand, consumers believe that those extensions coherent with the parent brand have a higher quality (Aaker and Keller, 1990;
Völckner and Sattler, 2006) because they share the reputation and credibility acquired in the market (Milewicz and Herbig, 1994). Thus, the attitude towards an extension is more favorable as brand image fit increases (Bhat and Reddy, 2001; Seltene, 2004). The cited works justify the following hypotheses:

H1. Brand awareness has a direct positive influence on initial brand image. H2. Initial brand image has a direct positive influence on brand loyalty.
Johnson and Wilson (1993) demonstrate that companies capitalize on corporate brand equity in such a way that reputation and awareness transfer from existing markets to others where the company has no product offering. Such observation suggests that brand knowledge has a direct impact on the assessment of extensions
(Hem et al., 2003; Völckner and Sattler, 2006), thus reducing the risk that purchase processes generate (Keller, 2003). On the one hand, consumers who are less familiar with a product category are more likely to rely on brand awareness as a heuristic to guide evaluations of the extension (Hoyer and Brown, 1990). Thus, the higher the brand awareness is, the higher should be the perceived quality of any product linked to the brand. On the other hand, repeated exposure to stimuli, like a brand name, results in higher affective preference for the stimuli due to a “mere exposure-effect” (Lane, 2000; Zajonc, 1980).
Once the consumer has formed this cognitive structure, both general brand associations and those specifically related to quality (van Riel et al., 2001; Völckner and Sattler, 2006), affection (Sheinin and Schmitt,
1994) and reputation (Hem et al., 2003) directly imply a more positive evaluation of brand extensions. The following hypotheses summarize the arguments exposed above:

H6. Initial brand image has a direct positive influence on the extensionbrand image perceived fit.
H7. The higher the extension-brand image perceived fit, the more favorable the attitude towards the extension.
After elucidating how consumers evaluate brand extensions, the next hypotheses seek to explain the feedback effects on brand associations. First, it is obvious that brand associations will mostly remain after marketing the extension, that is, the initial image of the brand will condition the final attitude (Lee and Ulgado, 1993). Through knowledge of the extension or watching advertisements, consumers will recover the beliefs and attitudes that form an associative structure in their minds (Anderson, 1983; Morrin, 1999). Therefore, this bundle of associations that shape brand image (Keller, 2003) will depend on the image prior to the stimuli utilized.
Initial brand associations are sensitive to the information introduced by the extension, and reinforced or diluted according to the assessment of the new product (Lane and Jacobson,1997; Martínez and de Chernatony, 2004). It is reasonable to assume that final brand image will depend on the attitude toward brand extensions, in the same way that attitude toward the brand has an effect on brand image (Faircloth et al., 2001; Low and Lamb, 2000). The literature also reveals that consumers' evaluation of brand extensions has a positive effect on both general and specific beliefs about the brand (Martínez and de
Chernatony, 2004). However, Alexander and Colgate (2005) find that those consumers satisfied with retail brand extensions are increasingly more satisfied with the parent brands, which undoubtedly affects brand image. All these arguments lead to the following hypotheses:

H3. Brand awareness has a direct positive influence on brand extension attitude. H4. Initial brand image has a direct positive influence on brand extension attitude. Similar to awareness or brand image, brand loyalty also influences the formation of attitude towards extensions. The attitude to an extension is better when the consumer trusts the brand (Reast, 2005), buys the brand's products regularly or shows a commitment to repurchase them (Völckner and Sattler, 2006). This relationship might create a virtuous cycle in which loyal consumers are more likely to have experiences with the brand, and experienced consumers are more likely to try the extension (Swaminathan et al., 2001;
Swaminathan, 2003). In short, brand loyalty leads to a better extension attitude (Park and Kim, 2001) given that higher intention

H8. Initial brand image has a direct positive influence on final brand image. H9. The attitude towards the extension has a direct positive influence on final brand image.

٥٩

308

E. Martínez et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 305–313

Based on the above literature review and hypotheses, this study introduces the model depicted in Fig. 1. The model consists of three main parts that explain how brand extensions influence the parent brand image. The first part deals with brand extension evaluation, considering the influence of brand equity factors and image fit. The second part refers to feedback effects, showing how the brand image that follows the extension introduction depends on initial brand associations and extension attitude. Lastly, the model includes some moderating effects of advertising on the relationship between initial brand image and brand extension evaluation.

Companies might change the consumer response toward brand extensions through marketing actions like advertising campaigns. In general, the use of advertising increases the chances of acceptance of extensions (Kim, 2003; Reddy et al., 1994). Some authors have demonstrated the need of providing information about the extension which is coherent with the brand's associations and objectives
(Bridges et al., 2000; Pryor and Brodie, 1998). This information could moderate the effect of initial brand image on the attitude toward the extension, provided that companies employ ads that adequately combine the brand associations and the new category ones. Subsequently, the paper focuses on this under-researched area.
Aaker and Keller (1990), and Bridges et al. (2000) verify the positive effects of transmitting favorable associations of the parent brand (relational strategies) or the new product (elaboration strategies), coherent with brand image. Similarly, other studies analyze the effect of providing information about the extension that varies in the degree of coherence with brand associations or objectives
(Martin et al., 2005; Pryor and Brodie, 1998). Consumers strive to make sense of all the information they receive, either congruent or not with their expectations (Grewal, Krishnan, Baker, and Borin, 1998). In this process, the consumer will likely remember his stored brand associations, which will facilitate the assessment of both the information provided and the new product.
According to Sheinin (1998), positioning the extension in relation to the parent brand or the new product will affect the transfer of associations between the extended category and the brand. As advertisements highlight the positive aspects of the brand in the new context (Aaker and Keller, 1990; Bridges et al., 2000), brand image has a greater impact on the assessment of the extension. This situation mainly occurs when the information focuses on the brand's name
(Sheinin, 1998). Hence, it follows from previous findings that:

4. Research design and method
The methodology to test the hypotheses consists of an experiment with different groups of undergraduates. Structural equation modeling (SEM) is used to analyze the data obtained. Contrary to classical experimental techniques such as ANOVA, SEM methodology can account for independent variable errors and model multiple relationships simultaneously (Bollen, 1989; Hair, Anderson, Tatham, and
Black, 1998), which results in more powerful tests of mean differences
(Bagozzi and Yi, 1989). In addition to that, Kline (2005) proposes SEM as a useful methodology to deal with longitudinal variables. This situation occurs when measuring brand image before and after the extension information, as in the present study.
Specifically, the experiment referred to a 3 (advertisement type: brand focused vs. extension focused vs. no advertisement) × 2 (brand type: image 1 vs. image 2) × 2 (extension type: high fit vs. low fit) between-subjects design. As in much previous research, the experiment utilized real brands and fictitious extensions (Diamantopoulos et al., 2005; John et al., 1998; Martínez and de Chernatony, 2004; etc.).
Thus, the experiment included some fictitious advertisements with information about the brand and/or the new product. Undergraduates took part in the experiment treatments and in two previous pre-tests.
Convenience samples of students are quite common in studies involving brand perceptions (e.g., Aaker and Keller, 1990; Morrin,
1999; Taylor and Bearden, 2002) since they facilitate the control of external variables. According to Pitt and Nel (1989), undergraduates are good substitutes for consumers when testing involves humaninformation processing.

H10a. The effect of initial brand image on the attitude towards the extension is higher when consumers visualize advertisements than when they do not.
H10b. The effect of initial brand image on the attitude towards the extension is higher when the advertisements focus on the brand than when they focus on the extension.

Fig. 1. Proposed model to analyze how brand extensions influence brand image.

٦٠

E. Martínez et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 305–313

It is worth mentioning here that individuals assessed final brand image with the same questions as initial brand image, although bearing the new product in mind. There are other alternatives to assess feedback effects, such as including a control group that receives no information about the extensions, which is compared with the groups exposed to the brand extensions (John et al., 1998; Keller and Aaker,
1992; Loken and John, 1993). This procedure makes it unnecessary to ask about the same concept twice, although it prevents researchers from measuring the changes in individuals' beliefs.
With respect to ad treatment, the experiment included eight alternatives depending on the brand (Pascual, Celta), the extension
(chocolate bars, bath gel) and the information contained in the advertisement (brand focused, extension focused). These advertisements combined visual elements and text, as usual (Lane, 2000;
MacKenzie and Lutz, 1989). At the top of the ad there was a fictitious image of the product designed with ArcSoft Photo Studio 5 software, adding the brand logotypes to real images of product categories. The body of the ads included a text highlighting some keywords in bold like the brand name and the associations found in the second pre-test common to Pascual and Celta (quality, family-oriented, etc.). As an example, Appendix A shows two of the advertising stimuli.

4.1. Pre-tests
The aim of the first pre-test, which included 61 individuals, was to identify two family brands of dairy products with a significantly different image. The reason to choose the dairy product sector is that it represents an important portion of the average household expenses in
Spain (Anuario El País, 2004) and has very popular brands, which is an essential requirement to obtain an accurate measurement (Low and
Lamb, 2000; van Heerden and Puth, 1995). Moreover, the subjects chosen for the study regularly consume this kind of products and constitute an important target group of companies in the fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) sector. According to Bird et al. (1970), the proportion of people who hold a positive attitude toward a brand is directly proportional to the current users. Consequently, controlling brand experience is a pre-requisite for measuring brand attitudes.
Hence, participants in the pre-test assessed, through seven-point
Likert scales, six brands with a strong presence at retailers. The results recommended the choice of Pascual and Celta, two very well-known brands (FP = 5.8; FC = 4.7) (1 = not familiar at all/7 = very familiar), but with a different image (IP = 6.0; IC = 4.3; Z = − 5.74; p b 0.01) (1 = very bad image/7 = excellent image). According to their products, Celta is only associated to milk whereas Pascual is also associated to yoghurt, milk shakes, juice and cereals.
In an additional pre-test, 47 undergraduates assessed the fit of eight potential extensions of Pascual and Celta to identify two product categories, one close to the parent brand and the other far from it.
Following Aaker and Keller (1990), both extensions must be logical. The first choice was “chocolate bars”, which received the highest perceived fit with the image of the brands (IFP = 5.5; IFC = 5.2) (1 = no coherence/7 = strong coherence). As regards far extensions, the choice was “bath gel” since its fit was significantly different both for Pascual (IFP = 1.3; ZP =
− 4.32; p b 0.01) and Celta (IFC = 1.7; ZC = − 4.14; p b 0.01). In the case of
Celta, a too reduced fit recommended to discard other products.
In the second pre-test, two open questions assessed the main characteristics and qualities and the type of consumer of Pascual and
Celta. This information was useful for the later creation of advertisements. The individuals associated both brands with quality (96% vs.
39.1%) and dairy products (8% vs. 17.4%). They identified the whole family (20% vs. 17.4%) and health-concerned individuals (16% vs. 17.4%) as the target public.

4.3. Variable measurement
All the variables were measured through seven-point Likert scales, except for an open question used to find the number of products associated with each brand (Boush and Loken, 1991). Table 2 summarizes the characteristics of the scales and the previous works on which they are based. In addition to the variables shown in the table, the credibility of the advertisements and the degree of attention were also assessed in order to verify the suitability of the advertising manipulations. In order to measure brand awareness, which refers to the strength of a brand's presence in the customer's mind, the study employs the five-item-scale of Yoo et al. (2000). Following Yoo et al. (2000), three items also assess brand loyalty cues like the feeling of attachment, purchasing behavior and word-of-mouth communication. Regarding image fit, a three-item-scale considers the beliefs of individuals about the logic or appropriateness of launching the extension (Aaker and
Keller, 1990; Taylor and Bearden, 2002). In the same way, the scale of attitude toward the extension includes three items that measure the global assessment of the new product and purchase intentions (Aaker and Keller, 1990; Pryor and Brodie, 1998).
Brand image, unlike the previous factors, is a multidimensional construct that consists of different associations related to the cognitive, affective and global brand perceptions in the mind of the consumer
(Aaker, 1996). Thus, the scale of brand image considers three dimensions related to the benefit and tangible (functional image) and intangible
(affective image) attributes, as well as the global attitude to the brand
(reputation). The specific items come from the study of Martínez,
Montaner, and Pina (2004) based on the scales suggested in previous research (Aaker, 1996; Martin and Brown, 1990; Weiss et al., 1999).
It must be observed that the procedure of selecting the variables tried to guarantee content or face validity. A comprehensive review of the literature led us to select items consistent with the theoretical domains of the constructs. Furthermore, all the items had to be short and simple to ease their understanding and reliability (Churchill,
1979; Churchill and Peter, 1984). A pilot test with a few students verified that the scale items are easy to understand.

4.2. Design of the study and procedure
A sample of 599 undergraduates took part in the experiment.
Individuals were assigned to 12 groups and randomly received a questionnaire as a brand, extension and advertising treatment (see
Table 1). The questionnaire informed the subjects that the purpose of the study was to learn more about consumer behavior toward brands and products and that their opinion would be valuable.
The first part of the questionnaire was similar for all the scenarios and included questions about brand awareness, initial brand image and brand loyalty. The second part informed the individuals of the launch of product X and, if necessary, the undergraduates were exposed to a printed advertisement. In this case, the participants assessed ad credibility as well as image fit, extension attitude and final brand image.

Table 1
Size of each experimental group
Pascual

Celta

Chocolate bars
Non-advertisement
Brand-centered advertisement Extension-centered advertisement 309

Shower gel

Chocolate bars

Shower gel

5. Results

n = 46 (G1) n = 53 (G2)

n = 46 (G7) n = 48 (G8)

n = 46 (G4) n = 55 (G5)

n = 45 (G10) n = 57 (G11)

5.1. Validation of the scales and manipulation checks

n = 48 (G3)

n = 50 (G9)

n = 52 (G6)

n = 53 (G12)

The first stage of the analysis was the validation of the scales with the aid of SPSS 13.0 and EQS 6.1. The results of an initial factorial study

٦١

E. Martínez et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 305–313

310
Table 2
Scales used in the questionnaires
Scale

Table 3
Convergent validity, reliability and fit of the measurement model
Measured concept

Factor

AWAR1: The brand is familiar
AWAR2: The brand is thought to be well known
AWAR3: The brand can be recognized among competitors AWAR4: It is talked about the brand
AWAR5: The brand is well known
Brand image (IMAG) (initial/final) FUNCTIONAL IMAGE (FUIM) (initial/final)
Martínez et al. (2004)
FUIM1i/FUIM1f: The products have a high quality
Based on:
FUIM2i/FUIM2f: The products have better
Aaker (1996) characteristics than competitors'
Martin and Brown (1990)
FUIM3i/FUIM3f: The products of the competitors are usually cheaper
Weiss et al. (1999)
AFFECTIVE IMAGE (AFIM) (initial/final)
AFIM1i/AFIM1f: The brand is nice
AFIM2i/AFIM2f: The brand has a personality that distinguish itself from competitor s' brands
AFIM3i/AFIM3f: It's a brand that doesn't disappoint its customers
REPUTATION (REIM) (initial/final)
REIM1i/REIM1f: It's one of the best brands in the sector REIM2i/REIM2f: The brand is very consolidated in the market
Brand loyalty (LOYA)
LOYA1: Feeling of loyalty to the brand
Yoo et al. (2000)
LOYA2: Choice of the brand at the store
LOYA3: Recommendation of the brand to others consumers Image fit (IMFI)
IMFI1: The product extension fits with the brand image Aaker and Keller (1990)
IMFI2: Launching the extension is logical for the company Taylor and Bearden (2002)
IMFI3: Launching the extension is appropriate for the company
Extension attitude (EXAT)
EXAT1: Favorability of the extension
Aaker and Keller (1990)
EXAT2: Perceived quality of the extension
Pryor and Brodie (1998)
EXAT3: Likelihood of trying the extension

AWAR

FUIM (i)
FUIM (f)
AFIM (i)

AFIM (f)

REIM (i)
REIM (f)
LOYA

IMFI

EXAT

Fit indexes

Items

AWAR2
AWAR4
AWAR5
FUIM1i
FUIM2i
FUIM1f
FUIM2f
AFIM1i
AFIM2i
AFIM3i
AFIM1f
AFIM2f
AFIM3f
REIM1i
REIM2i
REIM1f
REIM2f
LOYA1
LOYA2
LOYA3
IMFI1
IMFI2
IMFI3
EXAT1
EXAT2
EXAT3

Convergent validity

Reliability

t (N 1.96)

Brand awareness (AWAR)
Yoo et al. (2000)

λ (N 0.5)

CRC (N 0.6)

EVA (N 0.5)

19.94
20.26
18.70
21.45
19.52
20.67
19.32
17.46
17.86
17.48
20.05
19.18
19.04
22.45
20.66
23.23
20.78
21.56
25.44
23.43
24.20
27.36
25.59
22.05
18.51
16.97

0.80
0.81
0.77
0.83
0.77
0.81
0.77
0.71
0.72
0.71
0.78
0.76
0.75
0.85
0.80
0.87
0.80
0.82
0.92
0.87
0.88
0.95
0.91
0.85
0.74
0.70

0.84

0.63

0.78

0.65

0.77

0.63

0.76

0.51

0.81

0.58

0.81

0.68

0.83

0.70

0.90

0.76

0.94

0.84

0.81

0.59

Global fit

Incremental fit

χ2 = 1147.66
(254) p = 0.00
GFI = 0.85

RMSEA = 0.08

CFI = 0.97

NFI = 0.96

SRMR = 0.05

IFI = 0.97

NNFI = 0.96

CRC: composite reliability coefficient, EVA: extracted variance analysis, GFI: goodnessof-fit index, RMSEA: root mean square error of approximation, SRMR: standardized root mean square residual, CFI: comparative fit index, IFI: incremental fit index, NFI: normed fit index, NNFI: nonnormed fit index.

revealed low correlations of several items with their respective factors
(FUIM3i, FUIM3f, AWAR1, AWAR3). After eliminating these indicators, a confirmatory analysis (ERLS estimation method) verified the reliability and validity of the scales. As seen in Table 3, factor loadings are all significant (t N 1.96) and exceed the cut-off point of 0.5
(Jöreskog and Sörbom, 1993). Moreover, the values obtained in composite reliability coefficients and extracted variance analysis
(EVA) are above 0.6 and 0.5 respectively (Hair et al., 1998).
Furthermore, goodness-of-fit indexes are above the minimum (GFI =
0.85; SRMR = 0.05; NFI = 0.96; IFI = 0.97) except in the Chi-square test
(p b 0.01), which is highly dependent on sample size (Hair et al., 1998;
Kline, 2005). Finally, discriminant validity was verified by checking that the value 1 was not within the confidence intervals of betweenfactor correlations.
The estimation of second-order models for the dimensions that form initial and final brand image permitted the adequate representation of the relationships. The goodness-of-fit indicators exceeded the recommended minimum for both initial (GFI = 0.96; SRMR = 0.03; NFI = 0.98;
IFI = 0.98) and final image (GFI = 0.96; SRMR = 0.03; NFI = 0.98; IFI = 0.97).
The experiment conditions also proved to be suitable, confirming some differences between the brand image of Pascual and Celta
(IMAGiP = 5.2; IMAGiC = 4.0; t = − 15.31; p b 0.01) and the perceived fit of the extensions (IMFI1 = 5.2; IMFI2 = 2.5; Z = − 18.66; p b 0.01). No differences occur in the credibility of the advertisements for each brand (CREDP = 4.2; CREDC = 3.9; Z = − 1.58; p = 0.11), as expected.

explain most of the variance in the attitude towards the extension
(R2 = 0.77) and brand image (R2 = 0.79). Once again, goodness-of-fit indexes show suitable values (GFI = 0.88; SRMR = 0.06; NFI = 0.97; IFI =
0.98).
According to the results, brand awareness has a significant positive effect on initial brand image (βest = 0.67; t = 14.72), a factor that, in turn, influences brand loyalty (βest = 0.70; t = 15.93). Consequently, the data do not allow the rejection of H1 and reveal that increasing brand

Table 4
Results of the structural model
Hypotheses

Standardized β (t)

Hypotheses validation

H1: AWAR → IMAGi
H2: IMAGi → LOYA
H3: AWAR → EXAT
H4: IMAGi → EXAT
H5: LOYA → EXAT
H6: IMAGi → IMFI
H7: IMFI → EXAT
H8: IMAGi → IMAGf
H9: EXAT → IMAGf

0.67⁎⁎ (14.72)
0.70⁎⁎ (15.93)
− 0.04 (− 0.78)
0.26⁎⁎ (4.19)
0.01 (0.12)
0.08⁎ (1.68)
0.82⁎⁎ (20.61)
0.67⁎⁎ (21.45)
0.42⁎⁎ (13.22)

Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Fit indexesa

Global fit

Incremental fit

χ2 = 921.97 (29) p = 0.00
GFI = 0.88
RMSEA = 0.06
SRMR = 0.06

CFI = 0.98
IFI = 0.98
NFI = 0.97
NNFI = 0.97

5.2. Contrast of model and hypotheses
The next stage of the analysis consisted of the estimation of the structural or proposed model. The main results, which are favorable to the model, appear in Table 4. On the whole, the variables of the study

a
See note in Table 3.
⁎ Significant at p ≤ 0.1.
⁎⁎ Significant at p ≤ 0.05.

٦٢

E. Martínez et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 305–313

6. Conclusions and implications

recall and recognition will lead to more favorable associations. These associations will strengthen brand loyalty, as H2 proposed.
As regards the influence of brand equity factors on attitude towards the extension, the only significant coefficient is the one related to initial image (βest = 0.26; t = 4.19), which supports H4.
Neither brand awareness (βest = − 0.04; t = − 0.78) nor brand loyalty
(βest = 0.01; t = 0.12) have a significant direct effect on the attitude towards the extension, which rejects H3 and H5. These results suggest that consumers leverage mainly brand associations to assess the new category whereas brand awareness and brand loyalty do not directly intervene in the evaluation process.
With respect to H6, initial brand image has a significant influence on perceived image fit (βest = 0.08; t = 1.68), although with a much reduced coefficient. However, the coefficient that relates fit and attitude to the extension is higher (βest = 0.82; t = 20.61), confirming
H7. The influence of perceived fit on extension attitude is outstandingly higher than the effect of initial brand image (0.82 N 0.26), which emphasizes the necessity of maintaining the brand associations in the new market. After applying an Aroian test (Preacher and
Leonardelli, 2001), image fit proves to have a mediating role (at 0.90 confidence level) between initial brand image and attitude towards the extension (Z = 1.67; p = 0.09).
Both H8 and H9, which explain final brand image, were not rejected. In the case of H8, data reveal a significant positive effect of initial brand image on final image (βest = 0.67; t = 21.45). As for H9, the standardized coefficient that relates attitude towards the extension and final brand image also presented a significant positive value (βest =
0.42; t = 13.22). Although the coefficient related to initial brand image is higher (0.67 N 0.42), this finding gives empirical support to the existence of feedback effects.
A multisample analysis, which calculated the Lagrange Multiplier
Test (Iglesias and Vázquez, 2001), tested H10a,b which is related to advertising (Table 5). Supporting H10a, initial brand image proved to have a stronger effect on attitude towards the extension when using advertisements, whether they are based on the brand (βest = 0.45 N
− 0.05n.s.; χ2dif = 10.56; p b 0.01) or on the new product (βest = 0.28 N
− 0.05n.s.; χ2dif = 4.02; p = 0.04). Hence, consumers that receive commercial information will probably view brand associations as more representative of the quality of the extension. Although brandfocused advertisements appear to have a stronger effect than extension-based ones (0.45 N 0.28), as proposed by H10b, the Chisquare difference was not significant (χ2dif = 0.89; p = 0.35). There was no evidence of any other moderating effects.
In short, most of the hypotheses of this study were accepted. In any case, the influence of brand loyalty (direct or indirect) on the assessment of the proposed extensions was not proved. In the FMCG sector consumers perceive a lower risk than in the purchase of durables and services (Hem et al., 2003), so they will not need to rely so much on brand loyalty as a risk reducer (Mitchell and Greatorex,
1993). On the other hand, the moderating analyses indicate that the advertisements based on the new product have a similar influence to those based on the extended brand. This similar role might be due to the fact that both formats transmit the brand essence (Kim, 2003), which would not occur if the information about the extension had been incoherent with the present associations (Sjödin and Törn,
2006).

Firms with a positive image have the possibility of extending their brand through new products (Balachander and Ghose, 2003). Given that brands are one of the most important assets for firms, researchers and practitioners alike are interested in learning how to leverage the current brand associations and minimize the risk of image dilution.
This paper has analyzed the feedback effects of brand extensions by proposing a theoretical model that considers the effects of brand equity dimensions, image fit and advertising. Unlike most previous research, which focuses only on their individual effects, this research examines the simultaneous relationships between these factors.
Moreover, the inclusion of advertising as a moderating variable yields innovative results that identify strategic options to increase brand image leveraging. The results obtained are, thus, especially important for managers to know which factors and marketing actions should receive the most attention, depending on their relative influence on consumer behavior.
According to the results of the model estimation, initial brand image transfers to the assessment of the new product, although this assessment may entail an alteration of existing beliefs. With an even more important role than brand image, attitude towards the extension depends on the perceived fit between the new category and brand associations, a fit that is higher in well-known brands.
These results are in line with previous research that contemplates brand associations and perceived fit as the key factors leading to the success of brand extensions (Aaker and Keller, 1990; Völckner and
Sattler, 2006).
A common assumption in the literature is that brand extensions leverage extended brand equity (Balachander and Ghose, 2003; John et al., 1998). However, the results of this research indicate that the effect of brand equity on extension attitude is very different depending on the dimension analyzed. Whereas brand image shows direct effects on extension attitude, neither brand awareness nor brand loyalty directly influences this variable. This result is possible since previous research did not consider that some factors explaining the success of an extension may be dependant variables in other structural relationships (Völckner and Sattler, 2006).
Despite the non-existence of a direct effect, brand awareness is indirectly related to the success of brand extensions through the initial brand image factor. Brand awareness, thus, largely determines brand associations, which have a positive effect on brand loyalty. This finding lends support to the theories of consumer behavior that propose a cognitive–affective–conative network (Azjen and Fishbein, 1980;
Deighton et al., 1994). In any case, the data fail to explain the expected interrelation between brand loyalty and extension evaluation (Park and Kim, 2001). Hence, general beliefs about quality and brand performance, rather than compromise or experience with other products of the firm, will explain consumer attitude toward the extension (Völckner and Sattler, 2006). As the model proposes, this attitude and the initial associations will be the main determinants of the brand image after the introduction of the extension (Lane and
Jacobson, 1997; Martínez and de Chernatony, 2004).
The analysis of the moderating effects reveals that initial brand image has a stronger effect on the attitude towards the extension when the potential consumers of the extension have access to advertisements. Furthermore, the result was always the same whether the advertisements analyzed highlighted features of the extension or associations of the brand. As long as the advertisements emphasize coherence with the brand image, a stronger recovery of beliefs will occur. Consequently, the advertising strategy is not a matter of positioning (Sheinin, 1998) or choosing between relational or elaboration strategies (Aaker and Keller, 1990; Bridges et al., 2000).
Whenever the ads reflect brand associations, directly or indirectly, consumers will be able to associate the new product with the brand and will not significantly vary their brand schemes.

Table 5
Results of the multisample analysis
Compared samples

NO AD−BR. AD
NO AD−EX. AD
BR. AD−EX. AD

Sample I

Sample II

LM test

St. β (t)

St. β (t)

χ2dif. (probability)

− 0.05 (− 0.49)
− 0.05 (− 0.49)
0.45⁎⁎ (4.77)

0.45⁎⁎ (4.77)
0.28⁎⁎ (2.52)
0.28⁎⁎ (2.52)

311

χ2dif = 10.56 (0.00)⁎⁎ χ2dif = 4.02 (0.04)⁎⁎ χ2dif = 0.89 (0.35)

BR. AD: Brand-centered advertisement EX. AD: Extension-centered advertisement.

٦٣

312

E. Martínez et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 305–313

Several business implications arise from these results. Firms that decide to introduce brand extensions, minimizing the risk of brand dilution, have to boost the coherence of the new product with the current perceptions of the brand. Rather than the category of the product, it is essential to transmit the brand essence from one market to the other (Kim, 2003). As long as the brand is well known and has a good image, it will be recommendable to support the introduction of an extension with advertising campaigns to remind consumers of their brand associations. Therefore, initial brand image will have a stronger effect on the attitude towards the extension and, indirectly, on final brand image. On the other hand, the fact that consumers are not firmly committed to the brand and its products does not hamper the success of extension strategies, provided that brand equity stems from awareness and brand image.
In further research, it would be of great interest to corroborate the results with real extensions, since previous studies only focus on purchase behavior (Balachander and Ghose, 2003; Reddy et al., 1994).
Moreover, researchers should examine the consistency of the results when using samples of non-students. Barrett et al. (1999) verify the robustness of the Aaker and Keller (1990) model (tested with students) in a sample representative of a national population.
Similarly, future research will have to prove that the factors that explain the attitude towards the extensions do not vary according to whether students take part in the experiments or not.

References
Aaker David A. Managing brand equity. Capitalizing on the value of brand name. New
York: The Free Press; 1991.
Aaker David A. Measuring brand equity across products and markets. Calif Manage Rev
1996;38(3):102–20.
Aaker David A, Keller Kevin L. Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. J Mark
1990;54:27–41 (January).
Ajzen Icek, Fishbein Martin. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior.
New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 1980.
Alexander Nicholas, Colgate Mark. Customers' responses to retail brand extensions.
J Market Manag 2005;21:393–419.
Anderson John R. A spreading activation theory of memory. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav
1983;22(3):261–95.
Anuario El País. Alimentación y Distribución en España 2002. Madrid: El País; 2004.
Bagozzi Richard P, Yi Youjae. On the use of structural equation models in experimental design. J Mark Res 1989;26(3):271–84.
Balachander Subramanian, Ghose Sanjoy. Reciprocal spillover effects: a strategic benefit of brand extensions. J Mark 2003;67(1):4–13.
Barone Michael J, Miniard Paul W, Romeo Jean B. The influence of positive mood on brand extension evaluations. J Consum Res 2000;24(4):386–400.
Barrett Joanna, Lye Ashley, Venkateswarlu P. Consumer perceptions of brand extensions: generalising Aaker and Keller's model. J Empir Gen Mark Sci
1999;4:1–21.
Bhat Sobodh, Reddy Srinivas K. The impact of parent brand attribute associations and affect on brand extension evaluation. J Bus Res 2001;53:111–22.
Bird Michael, Channon Charles, Ehrenberg Andrew SC. Brand image and brand usage.
J Mark Res 1970;7:307–14 (August).
Bollen Kenneth A. Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley; 1989.
Boush David M, Loken Barbara. A process-tracing study of brand extension evaluation.
J Mark Res 1991;28:16–28 (February).
Boush David M, Shipp Shannon, Loken Barbara, Genturck Ezra, Crockett Susan, Kennedy
Ellen, et al. Affect generalization to similar and dissimilar brand extensions. Psychol
Mark 1987;4(3):225–37.
Bridges Sheri, Keller Kevin L, Sood Sanjay. Communication strategies for brand extensions: enhancing perceived fit by establishing explanatory links. J Advert
2000;29(4):1–11 (Winter).
Bristol Terry. Consumers' beliefs resulting from conceptual combinations: conjunctive inferences about brand extensions. Psychol Mark 1996;13(6):571–89.
Chaudhuri Arjun, Holbrook Morris B. Product-class effects on brand commitment and brand outcomes: the role of brand trust and brand affect. J Brand Manag 2002;10
(1):33–58 (September).
Chen Kuang-Jung, Liu Chu-Mei. Positive brand extension trial and choice of parent brand. J Prod Brand Manag 2004;13(1):25–36.
Churchill Gilbert A. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs.
J Mark Res 1979;16:64–73.
Churchill Gilbert A, Peter J Paul. Research design effects on the reliability of rating scales: a meta-analysis. J Mark Res 1984;21:360–75.
Crane FG. The need for corporate advertising in the financial services industry: a case study illustration. J Serv Mark 1990;4(2):31–7 (Spring).
Czellar Sandor. Consumer attitude towards brand extensions: an integrative model and research propositions. Int J Res Mark 2003;20(1):97–115.
Dacin Peter A, Smith Daniel C. The effect of brand portfolio characteristics on consumer evaluations of brand extensions. J Mark Res 1994;31:229–42 (May). de Ruyter Ko, Wetzels Martin. The role of corporate image and extension similarity in service brand extensions. J Econ Psychol 2000;21:639–59 (Winter).
Deighton John, Henderson Caroline M, Neslin Scott. The effects of advertising on brand switching and repeat purchasing. J Mark Res 1994;31:28–43 (February).
Desai Kalpesh Kaushik, Hoyer Wayne D. Line extensions: a categorization and an information processing perspective. Adv Consum Res 1993;20:599–606.
Diamantopoulos Adamantios, Smith Gareth, Grime Ian. The impact of brand extensions on brand personality: experimental evidence. Eur J Mark 2005;39(1/2):129–49.
Dick Alan S, Basu Kunal. Customer loyalty: toward an integrated conceptual framework.
J Acad Mark Sci 1994;22(2):99–113.
Faircloth James B, Capella Louis M, Alford Bruce L. The effect of brand attitude and brand image on brand equity. J Mark Theory Pract 2001:61–75 Summer.
Farquhar Peter H. Managing brand equity. Mark Res 1989;1:24–33 (September).
Grewal Dhruv, Krishnan T, Baker Julie, Borin Norm. The effect of store name, brand name and price discounts on consumers' evaluations and purchase intentions. J Retail
1998;74(3):331–52.
Grime Ian, Diamantopoulos Adamantios, Smith Gareth. Consumer evaluations of extensions and their effects on the core brand. Eur J Mark 2002;36(11/12):1415–38.
Gürhan-Canli Zeynep, Maheswaran Durairaj. The effects of extensions on brand name dilution and enhancement. J Mark Res 1998;35:464–73 (November).
Hair Joseph F, Anderson Rolph E, Tatham Ronald L, Black William C. Multivariate data analysis. 5th ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1998.
Hem Leif E, Iversen Nina M. Transfer of brand equity in brand extensions: the importance of brand loyalty. Adv Consum Res 2003;30:72–9.
Hem Leif E, de Chernatony Leslie, Iversen Nina M. Factors influencing successful brand extensions. J Market Manag 2003;19(7–8):781–806 (August).
Hoyer Wayne D, Brown Steven P. Effects of brand awareness on choice for a common, repeat-purchase product. J Consum Res 1990;17(2):141–8 (September).
Iglesias Víctor, Vázquez Rodolfo. The moderating effects of exclusive dealing agreements on distributor satisfaction. J Strat Mark 2001;9(3):1–19.
Jacoby Jacob, Chestnut Robert W. Brand loyalty measurement and management. New
York: John Wiley and Sons; 1978.

Appendix A. Stimuli used in the experiment
Brand-centred advertisement for Pascual and chocolate bars extension Extension-centred advertisement for Celta and shower-gel extension

٦٤

E. Martínez et al. / Journal of Business Research 62 (2009) 305–313

313

Park C Whan, McCarthy Michael S, Milberg Sandra. The effects of direct and associative brand extension strategies on consumer response to brand extensions. Adv Consum
Res 1993;20:28–33.
Park C Whan, Milberg Sandra, Lawson Robert. Evaluation of brand extensions: the role of product feature similarity and brand concept consistency. J Consum Res
1991;18:185–93 (September).
Petty Richard E, Cacioppo John T. Attitudes and persuasion: classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: A.C. Brown; 1981.
Pitt Leyland, Nel Deon. Student surrogation in behavioral business research: a review and decision process model. Manage Res News 1989;12(6):13–9.
Preacher Kristopher J, Leonardelli Geoffrey J March. Calculation for the Sobel test: an interactive calculation tool for mediation tests Computer Software 2001; 2001. http://www.people.ku.edu/~preacher/sobel/sobel.htm (consulted in May, 2008).
Pryor Kevin, Brodie Roderick J. How advertising slogans can prime evaluations of brand extensions: further empirical results. J Prod Brand Manag 1998;7(6):497–508.
Rangaswamy Arvind, Burke Raymond, Oliva Terence A. Brand equity and the extendibility of brand names. Int J Res Mark 1993(10):61–75 North-Holland.
Reast Jon D. Brand trust and brand extension acceptance: the relationship. J Prod Brand
Manag 2005;14(1):4–13.
Reddy Srinivas K, Holak Susan L, Bhat Subodh. To extend or not to extend success determinants of line extensions. J Mark Res 1994;31:243–62 (May).
Reynolds William H. The role of the consumer in image building. Calif Manage Rev
1965;7:69–76.
Schmitt Bernd, Dubé Laurette. Contextualized representations of brand extensions: are feature lists or frames the basic components of consumer cognition? Mark Lett
1992;3(2):115–26.
Seltene Mehdi. Processus d'évaluation de l'extension de marque par le consommateur: conception et validation d'un modèle de décomposition. Res Appl Mark
2004;19(1):3–24.
Sheinin Daniel A. Positioning brand extensions implications for beliefs and attitudes.
J Prod Brand Manag 1998;7(2):137–49.
Sheinin Daniel A, Schmitt Bernd H. Extending brands with new product concepts: the role of category attribute congruity, brand affect, and brand breadth. J Bus Res
1994;31(1):1–10.
Sjödin Henrik, Törn Fredrik. When communication challenges brand associations: a framework for understanding consumer responses to brand image incongruity.
J Consum Behav 2006;5:32–42 (February).
Smith Daniel C, Park C Whan. The effects of brand extensions on market share and advertising efficiency. J Mark Res 1992;29:296–313 (August).
Stern Barbara, Zinkhan George M, Jaju Anupam. Marketing images. Construct definition, measurement issues, and theory development. Mark Theory 2001;1(2):201–24.
Swaminathan Vanitha. Sequential brand extensions and brand choice behavior. J Bus
Res 2003;56:431–42.
Swaminathan Vanitha, Fox Richard J, Reddy Srinivas K. The impact of brand extension introduction on choice. J Mark 2001;65:1–15 (October).
Taylor Valerie A, Bearden William O. The effects of price on brand extension evaluations: the moderating role of extension similarity. J Acad Mark Sci 2002;30(2):131–40.
Taylor Valerie A, Bearden William O. Ad spending on brand extensions: does similarity matter? Brand Manag 2003;11(1):63–74 (September).
Thorbjørnsen Helge. Brand extension brand concept congruency and feedback effects revised. J Prod Brand Manag 2005;14(4/5):250–5.
Vakratsas Demetrios, Ambler Tim. How advertising works: what do we really know?
J Mark 1999;63:26–43 (January). van Heerden Cornelius H, Puth Gustav. Factors that determine the corporate image of
South African banking institutions: an exploratory investigation. Int J Bank Mark
1995;13(3):12–7.
van Riel Allard, Lemmink Jos, Ouwersloot Hans. Consumer evaluations of service brand extensions. J Serv Res 2001;3(3):220–31 (February).
Villarejo Ángel F, Sánchez Manuel J. The impact of marketing communication and price promotion on brand equity. J Brand Manag 2005;12(6):431–45 (August).
Völckner Franziska, Sattler Henrik. Drivers of brand extension success. J Mark 2006;70(2):
18–34.
Weber Renee, Crocker Jennifer. Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic beliefs.
J Pers Soc Psychol 1983;45:961–77 (November).
Weiss Allen M, Anderson Erin, MacInnis Deborah J. Reputation management as a motivation for sales structure decisions. J Mark 1999;63:74–89 (October).
Yoo Boonghee, Donthu Naveen, Lee Sungho. An examination of selected marketing mix elements and brand equity. J Acad Mark Sci 2000;28(2):195–211.
Zajonc Robert B. Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences. Am Psychol
1980;35:151–75.

John Deborah R, Loken Barbara, Joiner Christopher. The negative impact of extensions: can flagship products be diluted. J Mark 1998;62(January):19–32.
Johnson Brent J, Wilson David T. Updating image research for the 1990s: the contribution of a company's market image to marketing strategy. ISBM Report 12.
The Pennsylvania State University; 1993.
Jöreskog Karl G, Sörbom Dag. LISREL 8: Structural equation modelling with the SIMPLES
Command Language. Illinois: Scientific Software International SSI; 1993.
Kapferer Jean Noel. The new strategic brand management. Creating and sustaining brand equity long term. 3rd ed. Londres: Kogan Page; 2004.
Karaosmanoglu Elif, Melewar TC. Corporate communications, identity and image: a research agenda. Brand Manag 2006;14(1/2):196–206 (September–November).
Karson Eric J, Fisher Robert J. Predicting intentions to return to the web site: extending the dual mediation hypothesis. J Interact Market 2005;19(3):2–14.
Keller Kevin L. Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. J Mark 1993;57:1–22 (January).
Keller Kevin L. Brand synthesis: the multidimensionality of brand knowledge. J Consum
Res 2003;29:595–600 (March).
Keller Kevin L, Aaker David A. The effects of sequential introduction of brand extensions.
J Mark Res 1992;29:35–50 (February).
Kim Joo Y. Communication message strategies for brand extensions. J Prod Brand Manag
2003;12(7):462–76.
Kline Rex B. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 2nd ed. New York:
The Guilford Press; 2005.
Korchia Michaël. The effects of brand associations on three constructs. Proceedings of the 33rd EMAC Conference. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia; 2004.
Lane Vicki R. The impact of ad repetition and ad content on consumer perceptions of incongruent extensions. J Mark 2000;64:80–91 (April).
Lane Vicki R, Jacobson Robert. The reciprocal impact of brand leveraging: feedback effects from brand extension evaluation to brand evaluation 1997. Mark Lett
1997;8(3):261–71.
Lee Moonkyu, Ulgado Francis M. Service extension strategy: a viable basis for growth?
J Serv Mark 1993;7(2):24–35.
Lemmink Jos, Schuijf Annelien, Streukens Sandra. The role of corporate image and company employment image in explaining application intentions. J Econ Psychol
2003;24:1–15.
Loken Barbara, John Deborah R. Diluting brand beliefs: when do brand extensions have a negative impact? J Mark 1993;57:71–84 (July).
Low George S, Lamb Charles W. The measurement and dimensionality of brand associations. J Prod Brand Manag 2000;9(6):350–68.
MacKenzie Scott B, Lutz Richard J. An empirical examination of the structural antecedents of attitude toward the ad in an advertising pretesting context. J Mark
1989;53:48–65 (April).
MacKenzie Scott B, Lutz Richard J, Belch George E. The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: a test of competing explanations. J Mark Res
1986;13:130–43 (May).
Martin Gregory S, Brown Tom J. In search of brand equity: the conceptualization and measurement of the brand impression construct. In: Childers ML, et al, editor.
Marketing theory and applications, vol. 2. Chicago: American Marketing Association; 1990. p. 431–8.
Martin Ingrid M, Stewart David W, Matta Shashi. Branding strategies, marketing communication, and perceived brand meaning: the transfer of purposive, goaloriented brand meaning to brand extensions. J Acad Mark Sci 2005;33(3):275–94.
Martínez Eva, de Chernatony Leslie. The effect of brand extension strategies upon brand image. J Consum Mark 2004;21(1):39–50.
Martínez Eva, Montaner Teresa, Pina José M. Leveraging brand image in new product introduction. An operational measurement. Proceedings of the 11th International
Product Development Management Conference. Dublin: Trinity College; 2004.
Milewicz John, Herbig Paul. Evaluating the brand extension decision using a model of reputation building. J Prod Brand Manag 1994;3(1):39–47.
Mitchell Vincent-Wayne, Greatorex Mike. Risk perception and reduction in the purchase of consumer services. Serv Ind J 1993;13(4):179–200 (October).
Morrin Maureen. The impact of brand extensions on parent brand memory structures and retrieval processes. J Mark Res 1999;36:517–25 (November).
Na Woon B, Marshall Roger, Keller Kevin L. Measuring brand power: validating a model for optimizing brand equity. J Prod Brand Manag 1999;8(3):170–84.
Nijssen Edwin J. Success factors of line extensions of fast-moving consumer goods. Eur J
Mark 1999;33(5/6):450–69.
Pappu Ravi, Quester Pascale G, Cooksey Ray W. Consumer-based brand equity: improving the measurement — empirical evidence. J Prod Brand Manag 2005;14(3):143–54.
Park Jong Won, Kim Kyeong-Heui. Role of consumer relationships with a brand in brand extensions: some exploratory findings. Adv Consum Res 2001;28:179–85.
Park C Whan, Jaworski Bernard J, MacInnis Deborah J. Strategic brand concept management. J Mark 1986;50:135–45 (October).

٦٥

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Branding

...Branding What does Branding mean? It is the process of creating a magnificent name and image in the consumer's mind for a product. This kind of process can be done through advertising campaigns with a particular theme. By developing brand recognition, customer awareness will increase. Marketers have to take time and careful planning to create a fantastic name and image for their brand. (BusinessDictionary.com, 2014)  What to consider before when developing a brand. (Sorensen, 2014) To create a perfect brand name, marketers need to consider few steps before developing their brand.   * Marketers need to identify the target market: they need to know what type of customers they need to attract. For example, if they want to attract younger customers; trendy photos and music will attract them.  * Marketers have to consider legalities: they have to make some research before developing their ideas about the brand to make sure that they do not infringe on other competitors brand. Also, by doing this step legally, marketers will protect their company's name. * Marketers have to consider the logo and color scheme for their brand: Choosing a simple color and unique graphics can help to create the brand name. * Marketers need to consider celebrity endorsements when they are creating their brand name. Using a famous person in their advertisements and commercials can help to grab customers' attention. When marketers do that they will have two advantages, one of them is they...

Words: 617 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Branding

...of Marketing Lecturer: Tracy Gallagher Assignment: Branding Executive summary In this paper, the author will critically discuss the role of branding plays in a globalisation economy; this will be done by identifying the roles and describing them. The paper will also examine how marketers build brand equality using two case studies to illustrate theory This research will be done by drawing on relevant theoretical models; recent international case studies and reflects on the writings of academic writers and so on. Based on the evidence found when researching this paper, theorists Branding Branding is a differentiation of a product which helps in adding value to them. It helps companies to distinguish their products from those that are on the market. An example of this is if Penny’s stores was to have in store Brown Thomas products, customers would expect those products to be less expensive and of the lowest quality, the same goes for if Brown Tomas was to display a product from Penny’s, consumers would regard the product as expensive and of high quality, this is so because of the belief that consumers hav​​e for a particular brand. Brassington & Pettitt (2006) defined branding as a way of linking together items within a product line or emphasising the individuality of product items by making them easily identifiable. However Jobber and Fahy (2006) give a more detailed definition of branding where they go on and say branding is a process whereby company’s use to differentiate...

Words: 1481 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Branding

...o understand branding, it is important to know what brands are. A brand is the idea or image of a specific product or service that consumers connect with, by identifying the name, logo, slogan, or design of the company who owns the idea or image. Branding is when that idea or image is marketed so that it is recognizable by more and more people, and identified with a certain service or product when there are many other companies offering the same service or product. Advertising professionals work on branding not only to build brand recognition, but also to build good reputations and a set of standards to which the company should strive to maintain or surpass. Branding is an important part of Internet commerce, as branding allows companies to build their reputations as well as expand beyond the original product and service, and add to the revenue generated by the original brand. When working on branding, or building a brand, companies that are using web pages and search engine optimization have a few details to work out before being able to build a successful brand. Coordinating domain names and brand names are an important part of finding and keeping visitors and clients, as well as branding a new company. Coordination of a domain name and brand names lends identification to the idea or image of a specific product or service, which in turn lets visitors easily discovery the new brand. Branding is also a way to build an important company asset, which is a good reputation....

Words: 457 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Branding

...Branding Elizabeth Saracini April 27th, 2013 Marketing 300 Taste the Rainbow. Open Happiness. Eat Fresh. These slogans are recognized across America and around the globe due to the strong branding strategies implemented by the companies that own them. In today’s fast paced and technological world, it is essential for companies to use a simple image, sound, or phrase as a to communicate their reputation. Physical and auditory cues allow brands to take on personality traits that derive from the product’s core customer value. Branding can be very effective in a marketing product by adding perceived value, differentiating the product in a large market, and increasing brand recognition. Most importantly, branding can create a strong customer loyalty that simplifies purchase decisions and builds an emotional bond between the product and the consumer, which in turn leads to higher profits for the company and overall satisfaction. The initial concept of branding began with early civilization, almost 4000 years ago, when farmers branded their livestock to claim ownership over them. Potters’ marks on porcelain dishware and pottery were also recognized as an early form of branding. In the late 1800’s and early 1900’s countries around the world began to industrialize. Manufacturers now faced competition from previously insignificant countries because products could be produced and transported easily and efficiently. By the 1940’s, trade lines were opened across the globe and overall...

Words: 2125 - Pages: 9

Premium Essay

Branding

...important reason for the employees, investors and customers to associate with the company. It is the firm’s most important asset in the long term. It is also a bond between the customers and the company. A brand assures reliability and quality. Brand owners have a powerful incentive to ensure that each pie is as good as the previous one because that would persuade people to come back for more. Brands are perceptions. The Volvo brand stands for “safety”. The Mercedes Benz brand is associated with prestige”. “BMW means “the driving”. Can these perceptions be influenced or managed? That is precisely what is executed through branding. Branding is creating a corporate brand identity imprinted on the minds of consumers, and this requires brand positioning and brand management. Brands are the tools with which companies seek to build and retain customer loyalty and branding often...

Words: 13639 - Pages: 55

Premium Essay

Branding

...D o TNS - GLAKES N Brands & Brand Equity 26 June , 2012 ot C op y 1 Session 3 BEST GLOBAL BRANDS 2011 Interbrand 2011 Rankings Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Brand Coca – Cola IBM Microsoft Google GE Value ( $ mn.) C ot McDonalds Intel Apple N Disney D o Hewlett-Packard Global Brands Morgan Chase Data: Interbrand Corp., J.P. Scoreboard & Co / (Interbrand) Business Week September 10 The table ranks 10 top global brands that have a value greater than $1 billion. The brands were selected according to two criteria. They had to be global in nature, deriving 1/3 rd. or more of sales from outside their home country. There also had to be publicly available marketing and financial data on which to base the valuation. TNS - GREAT LAKES op y 71,861 69,905 59,087 53,317 42,808 35,593 35,217 33,492 29,018 28,479 Top 10 Most Trusted Indian Brands – 2011 RANK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 BRAND LUX COLGATE AIRTEL N D o 10 ot NOKIA DETTOL MAGGI TNS - GREAT LAKES C LIFEBUOY BRITTANNIA VODAFONE CLOSE-UP op y ( ET - Brand Equity Sep 28, 2011 ) BRANDS THAT LOST LUSTURE D o TNS - GREAT LAKES N ot C op y Some Leading US Brands since 1925 D o 1. Kodak 2. Del Monte 3. Wrigley 4. Nabisco 5. Gillette 6. Coca Cola 7. Campbell 8. Ivory 9. Goodyear 10. Lipton N ot TNS - GREAT LAKES C op y Cameras Canned Fruit Chewing Gum Biscuits Razors Soft Drinks Soups Soap Tyres Tea D o Category...

Words: 2275 - Pages: 10

Premium Essay

Branding

...Branding Products are never nameless. In fact, the term “household name” comes from a popular brand or product becoming a part of your home—seeing these products every day in your cabinets, pantry, refrigerator, bathroom, and even garage. There are many laws protecting products and their brand names because of ownership. The makers of these products have the exclusive right to produce these products while labeling them in order to separate themselves from makers of similar products. Branding isn’t only important for protecting rights to a company’s line of products, it also allows consumers to recognize a brand as its makers create new products, improve on existing products, and evolve as a company as a whole. When consumers continue to buy a certain brand, brand loyalty becomes an important part of business. Companies can know which products their consumers like, which ones need improving, and which ones aren’t selling. A lot of brands that become popular pour earnings back into their business to create more products, generating more products and ultimately more earnings. Though it was a huge blow to Anheuser-Busch to discontinue their brand name in Germany (a huge beer-consuming nation) and placing large ads at the World Cup in Germany, the court ruling was correct in protecting the Budvar labeling in Germany. Branding is everything to companies across the globe. If a company in Germany created a line of sports drinks and called them Gatorade, the court would rule...

Words: 330 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Branding

...Branding Strategy.... Building brand equity. “The branding strategy is creates strong brand values which have resonance with the customer and are relevant for the extent of the customers life cycle.” Learning objectives The first step in implementing a branding strategy is to understand the risk involved in the different strategies. After that, we will explore the implications of the different strategies on adding new products and incorporating acquired brands into the portfolio. After the lessons the student should be able to: • Understand the level of risk associated with the different branding strategies. • Understand what generates risk to the brand. • Identify which branding strategies are appropriate to the various segmentation plans. • Understand understanding how a company can avoid dilution of the brand as the product group grows. Brand equity The marketing goal is fulfilled when the brand equity is maximized. As in all matters relating to the concept of equity, there is a balance between risk and return. The choice between different branding strategies means balancing the expected return. A strategy with commonly yields high brand equity is usually associated with a significantly higher risk that the brand can be damaged when there are problems with any products carrying the brand. The brand equity should be seen as the accumulated value of all brands in the company portfolio. Different branding strategies are associated...

Words: 2805 - Pages: 12

Premium Essay

Branding

...engender trust. Brands are built on the product itself, the accompanying marketing activity, and the use (or non-use) by customers as well as others. Brands thus reflect the complete experience that customers have with products (Brands and Branding Research Findings and Future Priorities). Apple’s strategy is a corporate branding strategy that revolves around its emotional experience with its products. To be an emotional brand, it must have three things in common. The company must project a strong humanistic corporate culture; have a unique visual and verbal vocabulary; and establish a connection with its consumers (The Analysis of Apple’S Branding Strategies). Apple’s branding techniques is a demonstrated achievement. As indicated by a late article on Appleinsider.com, Apple's 254 retail stores offer 492,000 Macs to 38.6 million store guests amid the June quarter, with a large portion of those deals going to clients who had at no other time claimed a Mac. The company successfully achieved the tartgeted sales and also left a very positive impression on its product’s consumers. References: Donald R. Lehmann and Kevin Lane Keller, (May 2005), Brands and Branding Research Findings and Future Priorities, Pg. 1 Anna Glenn, The Analysis of Apple’S Branding Strategies, pg....

Words: 286 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Branding

...buy into and the brand then becomes more than its product. Labels that grasp the importance of branding understand that they must be more than the watch or bag or scarf. The appeal of a brand must be in who the consumer becomes when he or she puts on or uses a certain product. Brand awareness widens when a high-end label creates and conveys a clear message or lifestyle that the consumer thinks he or she can attain through purchase. That is the art of branding. Branding convinces the consumer not to simply buy a product, but instead buy the brand as a whole. A stellar product does not stand alone—behind it must be something deeper, a message or a symbol which should represent or relate back to the identity of the brand. Within the luxury sector, where products are often an investment regardless of one’s socio-economic status, conveying an identity is crucial. If the consumer cannot see what he or she will gain from purchasing a $2,000 handbag or a $26,000 watch, there will be no sale, and the ship that is the brand will sink. John Goodchild and Clive Callow, authors of Brands: Visions and Values, relate the success of brands to “their ability to communicate meaning.” They write that successful brands “communicate a rich set of messages and allow us to feel that we can relate to the underlying offer, be it a product, a service, or a company” (Goodchild, 21). Effective branding changes a consumer’s mentality from one of “I’ll buy that” to one of “I’ll buy into that.” Ralph...

Words: 2971 - Pages: 12

Premium Essay

Branding

...Institut d’Administration des Entreprises ROLES AND CONSIDERATIONS OF BRAND COMMUNICATIONS IN BRANDING: ADVERTISING, BRAND ELEMENTS, ONLINE ACTIVITIES Mémoire en vue de l’obtention du Diplôme De Master II ès Sciences de Gestion Soutenu par: Mojtaba Jebreili & Dirigé par: Professeur Damien Bo Advisor: Professeur Camelia Akbari Année universitaire: 2009-2010 0 Acknowledgment First of all I want to direct my thanks to my supervisor, doctor Damien Bo and appreciate him for useful feedbacks. Secondly I appreciate my advisor, doctor Camelia Akbari for her useful comments. Finally I would like to thank my family and special thanks to my dear wife who supported me during conducting this thesis just as always. University of Nice 2010 Mojtaba Jebreili i Abstract Brand is a very important element in today's life. Brand management has become a serious task for marketing and branding departments in all firms. While branding is a comprehensive issue dealing with all parts of a company, there are some branding tasks which are specifically accomplished by marketing and branding departments or branding companies. One of these tasks is brand communications consisting of the selection and design of brand elements, advertising and online branding. This thesis focuses on a qualitative review of different aspects of brand communications, while discussing their role in branding. The main questions in this thesis are the role and considerations of brand elements, advertising...

Words: 26997 - Pages: 108

Premium Essay

Branding

...The branding management of Tsingtao brewery Tsingtao Brewery Co., Ltd In 2004, China with the output of 27 million tons of beer became the world largest beer producer in the world. At the same time, Tsingtao Brewery Co., Ltd – the Hong Kong and Shanghai listed company had became China’s largest beer producer and exporter, with annual sales of 3.71 million tons of beer. By using four years of time, the company expanded its market share in China from 3% to 13% (1999-2002) and turn out to be the market leader. China’s beer market and segmentation According to the report, the top 10 brewers accounted 55% of the China’s beer market and Tsingtao, Yanjing and China Resources sold 8.1 million tons of beers in 2004. It summed up 30% of the sales. At the meantime foreign brands like Budweiser and Heineken started to enter the market and making profit. Since they occupied the high-end market and that’s the most promising and profitable market in China. They targeted the middle and upper class of the consumers and pricing at 7–9 yuan a can. In contrast Tsingtao was sold around 3.3 yuan. Furthermore in many tier two and three markets local brand beers were sold at 1 yuan. At this point we could segment the beer market into two. The first segment is ‘high price with strong branding’; the other segment is ‘low price with weak branding’. The major players in the first segment were those foreign brands as they did a better job in the marketing and promotion areas. As for the second...

Words: 653 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Branding

...TERM PAPER ON Brand Management OF "Tiger Sports" COURSE: Brand Management PREPARED FOR KASHFIA AHMED SENIOR LECTURER DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION East West University PREPARED BY Fuad Hasan Khan 2008-2-10-287 Prashanta singh 2008-3-10-148 Sheikh Irfan Hussain 2009-2-10-275 MD. Rashedushzaman khan 2009-2-10-126 Ashik Anowar 2008-3-13-041 Date of submission: 29th July, 2012 Executive Summary: The brand or the product we have worked with is Television sports channel in Bangladesh. We have named it as “Tiger-sports”. Our product logo indicates some spiritual and psychological satisfaction of Bangladeshi people. Because for the first time in Bangladesh we introduce official private sports channel which will be broadcasted within the territory of Bangladesh. Our focus would be on hundred percent pure and uniqueness. We have chosen a different television to launch because it would be the first in the market and differentiating would be easier for us. Our opportunity is we are going to launch it for the first time and if we get desired result in positioning in market then we will become the leader in sports television channel market. Our differentiating strategy is its High-definition sports news and game broadcast that no other company has claimed in Bangladesh yet...

Words: 3602 - Pages: 15

Premium Essay

Branding

...Brand Extension If you have ever named a boat, a pet or a child, you know how difficult it can be to choose the right name. Despite the importance of the decision, the process seems hit-and-miss and there seem to be few guidelines for getting it right. After agonizing over lists of alternatives, you reject all but one, with no sense of certainty. Later the name seems inevitable – how could you have considered any other name? The Challenge of Naming The naming challenge is compounded in a business environment, where anointing a company with a name is likely to be just the first of many labeling decisions. Products, business units, specific services, marketing programs, features, line extensions, apps, web sites and more all need monikers. Each decision has implications for future decisions, so it’s important to have a plan or ‘rules’ to guide your choices and avoid confusing customers. Although critically important to brand health and company value, it can be difficult to create the rules for naming brand entities, and for specifying the relationships among them. Here is a partial list of the kinds of challenges faced: * When is it desirable to extend an existing brand and when is a new brand required? * How should a new brand be linked to the parent? Should the relationship be explicit or kept in the shadows? * Which is better, a descriptive name or a fanciful name? * When should a name be retired? * When should a feature be branded? * Should different...

Words: 1327 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Branding

...BRAND DEVELOPMENT Presentation Paper By: WULAN YUNITA ISTIANILA DEWI (10311085) DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM UNIVERSITAS ISLAM INDONESIA 2012 Why it is important to create powerful brands WHAT IS BRANDING? Branding is a name, term, sign, symbol or design, or a combination of them, intended to identify the goods or services of one seller and to differentiate them from those of competitors. Brand often becomes a reason for people to choose the product as the sign or name of the quality level brings to consumers’ preference. Successful brand that is those which are the focus of a coherent blending of marketing resources, represent valuable marketing assets. Although, nowadays lots companies name their product with brands but the challenge of creating powerful and successful brand in grabbing strong positioning in consumers’ mind is exist. THE PURPOSES OF BRANDING Successful brands are valuable because they guarantee future income streams. Companies recognize that loyal customers will repeatedly buy their brands and are also willing to support them during crises, for example when people maliciously tamper with brands. In some instances the rapid response of management and their commitment to communicating developments to the brands’ stakeholders helps to rapidly restore normality. For example, following the tampering with Tylenol tablets enabled the management of Johnson & Johnson to quickly regain public confidence. The ultimate...

Words: 2456 - Pages: 10