Brands are all about trust …

1. BRANDING A VEHICLE FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGERichard Gilbert, Ph.D., H.E., OIAAmerican University of Health Science

2. Brands are all about trust … The reasonconsumersflock to some brands and ignore othersisthatbehind the brand stands an unspoken promise of value. That iswhy brands are becomingeven more important drivers of growth.

3. Brand is an experience A brand is essentially a container for a custumer’s complete experience with the offer and the company. (Sergio Zyman)

4. What is a Brand? User Culture Personality Attributes Benefits Values

5. The Brand as an Open System. Chanels, contacts … Corporation Economy … Relationships with customers Competition Organization’s associations Personality .Scope .Attributes .Uses .Quality/ Value .Functional Benefits Codes/Tone Skills (Core) Offer (Tangible Products & Services) Symbols Origin User Imagery Self-expressive benefits Name Tribes Cultures Groups … Emotional benefits

6. This Brand System interactsAS ... 1) .. A SOCIO-ECONOMIC AGENT 2) .. A CORPORATE ASSET 3) .. A STRATEGIC MARKETING TOOL 4) .. A COMMUNICATION & SELLING AGENT

7. THE BRAND AS A SOCIO-ECONOMIC AGENT • PART OF EACH INDIVIDUAL’S AND SOCIETAL GROUPS ’ SET OF REFERENCES • A POWERFUL SOCIAL DRIVER • A GLOBAL CEMENT • A VALUE ADDING ECONOMIC AGENT

8. Brand StrategicRole Brand Equity Cash flow booster Consumer Response Booster

9. THE BRAND AS A CORPORATE ASSET • A PROTECTED PROPERTY (owner's right to use) • BOOK VALUE, GOODWILL. - ASSET that can be sold and bought • MARKETING « NON TANGIBLE » ASSET precisely measurable and valuable (when brand is on sale) : • STRENGTH , LEADERSHIP & EQUITY, ie capacity to justify price.

10. Y&R ’s « Brandasset Valuator » PowerGrid

12. Building Brand Equity Perceived Quality Brand Associations Preference Name Awareness Other Brand Assets Brand Equity (Name & Symbol) Brand Loyalty • Value To Firm • Helps Programs • Brand Loyalty • Prices • Brand Extensions • Trade Leverage • Competitive • Advantage • Value To Customer • Info Processing • Confidence in Buying • Use Satisfaction

13. THE BRAND AS A COMMUNICATION & SELLING AGENT * A RELATIONSHIP ACTOR/BUILDER * AN INFLUENCER * IT GIVES MEANINGS TO PRODUCTS/SERVICES ... * ... AND A CREATOR OF « NEW » WORLDS

14. A modern brand is • A « persona » that overlays and includes the physicalproducts/services • the sum of fundamental values and attributesascribed to it by people • the entitythat the consumersconstructfrom the products’ meanings, symbols and images thattheyperceive as defining the brand.

15. FromTraditional to ExperientialBranding From • Brands as identifiers • Names, logos, slogans build awareness and image TO • Brands as experience providers • Names, logos, slogans, events, customer contacts which build sensory, affective, creative relations and ways of being (lifestyles) with the brands

16. Implications on Higher Education

17. New Demands on Higher Education • Changing landscape of competition in HE • Two university models: Do-it-Allversus • Do-it Different & Well • Branding as a vehicle for competitive niche marketing.

18. THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION (many countries) BEFORE: HE SECTOR nationally organised & regulated Funding centralized Competition limited & structured: e.g. polytechnics versus universities National (do-it-all) model for the university sector vis-à-vis job spec., pay scales, nominal standards, pension schemes, balance teaching/research

19. THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION EMERGING (DIRECTION) Competition increasing National (new universities), Europe, Anglophone international (USA, Canada, Australia, …India?) Pressures towards diversification of funding regimes Competition within many countries less structured/less limited: e.g. new universities, RAE, Russell Group, internationalization of Oxbridge & LSE, Bifurcation between teaching & research National models under pressure (pay differentials, limited term teaching contracts, international headhunting, overseas students

20. THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION • CHARACTERIZATION: Place versus space: plight of cities in a global economy Place bound cities can’t move and follow mobile capital • IMPERATIVE: To divert capital flows through particular cities To embed economic activity To develop economic activity less vulnerable to the vagaries of capital flight

21. CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION • Implications for urban economic strategy? • Higher value-added activities less vulnerable • Headquarter & R&D functions less prone to relocation • LESSON: • Do not produce high-volume, low value products. • Go for higher value, lower volume knowledge intensive, products.

22. CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION • Implications for urban economic strategy? • Importance of place-branding and place-marketing – • image /liveability • Imperative: Need to attract mobile, metropolitan middle classes Importance of good living environment, good food, good schools, liberal metropolitan activities and values

23. CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION HOW DOES THIS APPLY TO UNIVERSITIES? • Place-bound communities (like cities) • Need to divert capital & embed economic activity

24. CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION What kinds of capital? HUMAN CAPITAL: Better undergraduate students Better post-graduate students More international students Better academic staff

25. CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION What kinds of capital? • FINANCE CAPITAL • Capital investment (block funding, private sector) • Discretionary research funding (research councils) • Ancillary revenue streams • Short courses, • Commercial management of estates • Commercial management of other assets [merchandising?] • IPR/patenting/commercialisation of research • Private benefactors (alumni schemes etc)

26. CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION Key strategic problem: How to divert flows and attract these different forms of capital? Solution SENSE OF PLACE /COMMUNITY (PLACE-MARKETING, IMAGE, LIVEABILITY, AUTHENTICITY) HIGHER VALUE-ADDED NICHE PRODUCT, LESS VULNERABLE TO COMPETITIVE PRESSURES. Do something other universities don’t and preferably can not do. Do-it-Different and Do-it-Well

27. FINANCE CAPITAL • Capital investment • Research funding • Benefactors • Ancillary revenue streams • HUMAN CAPITAL • World class staff • Students CAMPUS ECONOMY & COMMUNITY CAMPUS MICRO-ECONOMY AS NODAL LEVER FOR ACCESSING WIDER NATIONAL & GLOBAL CAPITAL FLOWS BRAND CURRICULUM RESEARCH LOCATION & LANDSCAPE

28. TWO MODELS: DO-It-ALL or DO-it-Different and Do-it-Well • The traditional model: Do-it-All Universities • ‘Renaissance man’ • Enlightenment universalism • Shared perception of a ‘proper university’: • Full suite of science and humanities departments • Commitment to uneconomic, high prestige subjects (philosophy, classics , chemistry) Medical school • Highly centralised regulation and financing • From polytechnics to new universities: A rush to join the high table

29. DO-It-ALL or DO-it-Different and Do-it-Well • The traditional model: Do-it-All Universities • ACHIEVEMENTS: “ British Education” as international brand/benchmark Standardized level of provision and quality

30. DO-it-Different & Do-it-Well • American universities never like this. • Expansion of mass higher education + globalizing competition brings new pressures for market differentiation

31. Do-it-Different & Do-it-Well • Small – always struggled to ‘do it all’ • Traded on difference (e.g. Agricultural vs. Business)

32. Do-it-Different & Do-it-Well • Vulnerability: • Small campus university, rural location. • Too small to compete head-to-head • Lacks large urban ‘home’ market • Increasing competition from new universities • Lacks access to exciting metropolitan life • DANGER: • Being pushed down, pushed mainstream

33. Do-it-Different & Do-it-Well Opportunity: Already primed by history & tradition + location for Do-it-Different & Well Possibility of creating a market niche for a higher value, low volume, and more locally embedded product. Possibility of deciding how and against which institutions to compete (or better still side-step competition) RESPONSE: Aggressive & concerted niche marketing and lateral competition

34. BRANDING: A VEHICLE FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE • Framework tying together: • Place-marketing & liveability • Higher value added product Specifically: • Research • Teaching • Physical infrastructure and operations • Sense of place & community

35. TEACHING RESEARCH A B BRANDING C D CAMPUS ARCHITECTURE & OPERATIONS CAMPUS COMMUNITY BRANDING: A VEHICLE FOR COMPETITION ADVANTAGE A= Interdisciplinary research focus B= Interdisciplinary focus on teaching, including innovative links with NGOs and industry. C= Liveability and ‘sense of place’ (e.g. cinema, cafes, live music, music festivals, quality of retail outlets, second hand bookshop etc) D = Architecture, localisation of food, energy, and material inputs

36. BRANDING: A VEHICLE FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE Interdisciplinary research:

37. BRANDING: A VEHICLE FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE Interdisciplinary research: Teaching: Collegiality, learning culture, participation, engagement

38. Campus community and social life • Liveabilty – food culture, book shops, cinema, small bars, deli., farmers market, • Economy – Keep the money on campus

39. Campus community and social life Economy – Keep the money on campus: short courses, training

40. Thank You