1 / 21

AGENDA

FACTORS INFLUENCING CONSUMER DECISION-MAKING ON BRAND EXTENSION FOR COSMETIC PRODUCTS AMONG THAI CONSUMERS Presented by Voravut Charusomboon Prin Laksitamas D.B.A. Department of Doctoral Business Administration in Marketing Siam University. AGENDA. Objective Main ideas about Brand Extensions

paul
Download Presentation

AGENDA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. FACTORS INFLUENCING CONSUMER DECISION-MAKING ON BRAND EXTENSIONFOR COSMETIC PRODUCTS AMONG THAI CONSUMERSPresented byVoravut CharusomboonPrin Laksitamas D.B.A.Department of Doctoral Business Administration in MarketingSiam University

  2. AGENDA • Objective • Main ideas about Brand Extensions • Proposed Model • The model adapted from Voravut • The research Finding • Sumary • Reference

  3. Objective • To present the phenomenon of brand extension and investigates the correlation of consumer perception on the parent brand and the extended brand personalities.

  4. Brand extension or brand stretching is a marketing strategy in which a company marketing a product with a well-developed image uses the same brand name in a various product category.

  5. Perception is a necessary psychological process in order to understand how consumers recognition the new products made through brand extension.

  6. During the last years, the ethnic cosmetic trends and new consumption patterns make a niche for many cosmetic manufacturers and marketers to yield the market share and set up its new or stronger position in this segment. There are doubts that the brand extension might affect the parent brand and its extended brands in various ways.

  7. Main ideas aboutBrand Extensions Positive feeling According to Keller (1998) and Apostolopoulou (2002), brand extensions help organizations by increasing their strength, their customer base and their longterm viability.

  8. Kapferer (1997), one of the influential researchers in branding, marks in his context that although high cost are paid for companies with brands, companies are in fact purchasing certain places in the minds of potential consumers. He adds that awareness, image, trust and reputation could promise future success for the brand. So the value of a brand is partly represented by its ability to build such cash flows.

  9. According to Keller & Sanjay (2003 ), one of the most significant advantages of a strong trademark is the fact that it creates it easier for consumers to accept a brand extension. Due to the fact that brand extension diminishes the risk regarding consumers and reduces the cost with marketing and promotion, it has become the most frequent product tactics over the last two decades.

  10. Apostolopoulou (2002) found six keys to successful brand extension: • The strength of the parent brand • The recognized fit between the parent brand and the extended product • The promotional support and positioning of the extended brand • The quality of the extension product • The distribution tactics • The management of the expansion

  11. Main ideas aboutBrand Extensions Negative feeling Chen & Chen (2000) from study performed inTaiwan. The extended brand is perceived as cannibalizing the parent brand by eating into the total sales of the main brand. An extension can make consumer confusion concerning the quality of the new created products. Brand extension is seen as a lazy version of a new brand.

  12. According to Murphy (1990, p.110), “to improve new brands is extremely expensive, highly risky and takes a long time.” When he speaks about expenses, Murphy (1990) does not only mean the cost with making a new brand concept but also the costs with advertising in order to launch the new brand on the market as well as to support it during its whole life cycle.

  13. ModelProposed External influence effects on customers’ decision-making. Internal influence effects on customers’ decision-making.

  14. Experiences External Influences Culture Social Status Reference Groups Marketing Activities Decision-making On brand extension For cosmetic products Perception Expectation Of need Internal Influences Desires Perception Personality Emotions Attitudes Experiences

  15. The model • Despite many researchers have different perspectives relating brand extension , the model is tracking for cosmetic marketing relating consumers’ making decision.

  16. The Research Finding Expectation Perception and Attitude Brand judging Brand Knowledge Brand Extensions Eroding Promotion offers Cosmetic Product Shield environment To achieve growth

  17. Sumary Sum marizing that six steps from research finding will probe and successfully produce brand extension for cosmetic products.

  18. REFERENCES • Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity, Free Press, New York, NY. • Aaker, D.A. (1996), Building Strong Brands, Free Press, New York, NY. • Aaker,D.A.(1990),“Brand extensions: ‘the good, the bad, the ugly’”, Sloan Management Review, pp. 47-56. • Antoniedes, G. and Fred van Raaij, W.(1998). Consumer Behaviour- A European Perspective, John Willey & • Sons Ltd, England • Apostolopoulou, A.(2002).Brand Extensions by U.S. Professional Sport Teams: Motivations and Keys to • Success,Sport Marketing Quarterly, Vol.11, No 4 • Chen, A.C.H., and Chen, S.K. (2000). Brand dilution effect of extension failure-a Taiwan study. Journal of Product • and Management. Vol.9, No.4, pp.243-254 • Fox, R.J., Reddy, S.K., Swaminathan, V. (2001). The Impact of Brand Extension Introduction on Choice, Journal of • Marketing, Vol. 65, Issue 4 • Hartley, R. (1998). Marketing Mistake. London: Wiley • Hawkins, D., Best, R. & Coney, K. (2001). Consumer behaviour: Building Marketing Strategy. New York Irwin: • McGraw-Hill. • Kapferer, J.N. (2001) [re] inventing the brand, can top brands survive the new market realities? USA: Kogan Page • Limited. • Kapferer, J-N. (1997). Strategic brand management: creating and sustaining brand equity long term. London: • Kogan Page.

  19. Kapferer, J-N. (1997). Strategic brand management: creating and sustaining brand equity long term. London: • Kogan Page. • Keller, K.L. (1998), “Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity”, • Prentice-Hall International, Hemel Hempstead. • Keller, K.L. (2001). “Building customer-based brand equity”. Marketing Management, 10(2), 14-19. • Keller, K.L., Sood, S. (2003). Brand Equity Dilution, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 45, Issue 1 • Milberg, S.J., Park, C.W. and McCarthy, M.S. (1997), “Managing negative feedback effectsassociated with brand • extensions: the impact of alternative branding strategies”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 6(2), pp. • 119-40. • Muroma, M. and Saari, H (1996), “Fit as a determinant of success”, in Beracs, J., Baure, A. and Simon, J. (Eds), • Marketing for Expanding Europe, Proceedings of 25th Annual Conference of European Marketing Academy, pp. 1953-63. • Murphy, J. M. (1990). Brand Strategy. England: Prentice Hall Inc. • Nedungadi, P and Hutchinson, J (1985), “The prototypically of brand: relationshipwith brand awareness, • preference and usage”, Advances in Consumer Research, 12, pp. 498-503. • Park, C.W., Jun, S.Y. and Shocker, A.D. (1996), “Composite brand alliances: an investigation of extension and • feedback effects”, Journal of Marketing Research, 33(4), pp. 453-66 • Park, C.W., McCarthy, M.S. and Milberg, S.J. (1993), “The effects of direct and associative brand extension

  20. strategies on consumer responses to brand extensions”, Advances in Consumer Research, 20, pp. 28-33. • Park, C.W., Milberg, S.J. and Lawson, R. (1991), “Evaluation of brand extensions: the role of product feature • similarity and brand concept consistency”, Journal of Consumer Research, 18(2), pp. 185-93. • Roedder-John, D., Loken, B. and Joiner, C. (1998), “The negative impact of extensions: can flagship products be • diluted?”, Journal of Marketing, 62 (1), pp. 19-32 • Romeo, J.B.(1991),“The effect of negative information on the evaluation of brand extensions and the family brand”, • Advances in Consumer Research, 18, pp. 399-406. • Sheinin, D.A. and Schmitt, B.H (1994), “Extending brands with new product concepts: the role of category attribute • congruity, brand affect, and brand breadth”, Journal of Business Research, 31, pp. 1-10. • Tauber, E.M. (1981), “Brand franchise extensions: new products benefit from existing brand names”, Business • Horizons, 24(2), pp. 36-41. • Tauber, E.M. (1988), “Brand leverage: strategy for growth in a cost-controlled world”, Journal of Advertising • Research, 28, August-September, pp. 26-30.

  21. Further informationPlease contact viaE-mailvoravut_best@hotmail.comThank you

More Related