Note on Measuring Brand Awareness, Brand Image, Brand Equity and Brand Value Pierre Chandon
INSEAD March 2003
Note on Measuring Brand Awareness, Brand Image, Brand Equity and Brand Value
The purpose of this note is to provide an overview and references on the various methods that can be used to measure brand knowledge (brand awareness and brand image), brand equity and brand value. This note provides a short definition of each concept and illustrations of the most widely-used measurement techniques. Once you know what you want to measure, it is important to look at the original sources cited to understand how to properly use these techniques. Кеller’s (2003) ехсеllеnt book also provides detailed information on each concept and its measurement. 1. Brand knowledge
Brand knowledge refers to brand awareness (whether, and when, consumers know the brand) and brand image (what are the associations that consumers have with the brand) (Keller 2001). The different dimensions of brand knowledge can be classified in a pyramid (adapted from Keller 2001), in which each lower-level element provides the foundations of the higher- level element. In other words, brand attachment stems from rational and emotional brand evaluations, which derive from functional and emotional brand associations, and which necessitate brand awareness.
1.1. Brand awareness
Brand awareness measures the accessibility of the brand in memory. Brand awareness can measured through brand recall or brand recognition. Brand recall reflects the ability of consumers to retrieve the brand from memory when given the product category, the needs fulfilled by the category, or some other type of probe as a cue. Brand recognition reflects the ability of consumers to confirm prior exposure to the brand. Brand recall:
- Please name all the brands of beverages soft drinks carbonated soft drinks you can think of - Please name all the brands of beverages you can think of that you would bring to an INSEAD party. Possible results:
- 15 % of consumers think of Orangina when asked to provide the name of a soft drink (versus 30% for Coca-Cola). - Orangina is in the top 3 brands of party beverages for 30% of consumers (versus 70% for Coca-Cola). It is important to measure not only the depth of recall (the percentage of people who know the brand) but also the width of recall (the cues that lead to brand recall). Therefore, it is important to ponder the choice of the cue that will be used in the recall question. A good start is to think about who, when, where and how the brand will be bought or used). Typical cues are: - subcategories (beverages/soft drinks/colas/diet colas, etc). - consumption occasions/goals (beverages that you would consider purchasing for a romantic date, etc). - places (available in a supermarket, in a bar, etc).
- people (drink alone, in a group, etc).
In a recognition task, consumers see a stimulus (e.g., an ad, a brand name) and must say whether they have seen it before (e.g., last night on television, in magazine X, etc.). It is important to make the task as realistic as possible by allowing only a realistic amount of time and by using realistic stimuli and context. If you want to use recognition as a measure of the performance of different marketing actions (say, different logos or ads), you should expose one group to one version of the target stimulus and another group to the other version of the target stimulus. However, to make the task more realistic, both groups should also be exposed to other stimuli (e.g., competitors’ brands). In a second step, people see the “old” stimuli again, along with new ones and are asked to say if they have seen them before or not. To correct for people’s tendency to guess (recognizing when uncertain), you can compute a recognition score called “d prime,” as follows: d’ = HR — FA where HR is the hit rate (the % of respondents who recognize the target stimulus) and FA is the false...
References: Aaker, Jennifer, Veronica Benet-MartInez, and Jordi Garolera (2001), “Consumption Symbols as Carriers of Culture: A Study of Japanese and Spanish Brand Personality Constructs,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(3), 492-508.
Aaker, Jennifer L (1997), “Dimensions of brand personality,” JIVIR, Journal of Marketing Research, 34 (3), 347-56.
Agarwal, Manoj K. and Vithala R. Rao (1996), “An Empirical Comparison of Consumer- Based Measures of Brand Equity,” Marketing Letters, 7 (3), 237.
Ailawadi, Kusum L., Donald R. Lehmann, and Scott A Neslin (2002), “A Product-based Measure of Brand Equity.” Cambridge, MA: Report 02-102, Marketing Science Institute.
Dolan, Robert J. (1990), Conjoint Analysis: A Manager’s Guide. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Note 9-590-059.
Interbrand (2002), “The World’s Most Valuable Brands 2002: Ranking and Methodology,” http ://www.brandchannel . com/interbrand/test/html/events/ext sur. html.
Keller, Kevin L. (2003), Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity (Second ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Keller, Kevin Lane (2001), “Building Customer-based Brand Equity,” Marketing Management, 10(2), 14-19.
Malhotra, Naresh (1996), Marketing Research (2nd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Randall, Taylor, Karl Ulrich, and David Reibstein (1998), “Brand equity and vertical product line extent,” Marketing Science, 17 (4), 356-79 24 pages.
Reynolds, Thomas J. and Jonathan Gutman (1988), “Laddering Theory, Method, Analysis, and Interpretation,” Journal of Advertising Research, 28 (1), 13.
Simon, Carol J. and Mary W. Sullivan (1993), “The Measurement and Determinants of Brand Equity: A Financial Approach,” Marketing Science, 12 (1), 28.
Zaltman, Gerald and Robin A. Higie (1993), “Seeing the Voice of the Customer: The Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique.” Cambridge, MA: Working Paper 93-114, Marketing Science Institute.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document