Researchers and practitioners recognize the role of brand identity as an essential tool to effectively differentiate and manage brands (Aaker, 1996, Joachimsthaler and Aaker, 1999, Kapferer, 2008 and Keller, 2008). When considering brand options, “there are too many choices available today for customers to make the effort to work out what makes a particular brand specific” (Kapferer, 2008, p. 178). This growing competitiveness makes differentiation, and therefore brand identity, increasingly important.
Branding literature has tended to define brand identity as an internal construct that emanates unilaterally from the organization—what managers want the brand to be—and that requires stability over time (Aaker, 1996 and Kapferer, 2008). Accordingly, brand managers should develop and maintain a clear and consistent identity, so that brands can serve as stable references for consumers (Aaker, 1996 and Kapferer, 2008). Several management-oriented business publications have endorsed this approach, recommending a fixed brand identity. A widely-held belief is that a stable brand identity can help firms navigate and adapt to market changes (Collins & Porras, 1994). In practice, and consistent with this principle, companies seek to stabilize the identity of their brands over time. For example, Nestlé currently re-examines its brands' identities every four years.
However, the environment is increasingly dynamic and many markets are experiencing unexpected mutations and hard-to-predict transformations. Furthermore, the marketing domain is evolving to a new dominant logic, in which exchange processes and relationships among market actors are increasingly central (Sheth and Parvatiyar, 1995 and Vargo and Lusch, 2004). Proactive consumer involvement (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2000) requires co-opting consumer participation in the value-creation process (Vargo & Lusch, 2004), whereby consumers become active contributors (Arnould and Thompson, 2005, Brown et al., 2003, Payne et al., 2009 and Prahalad, 2004). Such challenges call for a new insight into the conceptualization of brand identity.
This paper seeks to advance the notion of brand identity by re-conceptualizing brand identity as dynamic and emanating from multiple actors (e.g., brand managers, consumers). Three insights provide support for this rationale: (1) Although definitions do not clearly articulate the dynamic understanding of brand identity, this idea is present in branding literature through brand identity frameworks (e.g., Aaker, 1996, de Chernatony, 1999 and Kapferer, 1986); (2) Parallel domains of research conceptualize identity as dynamic, engaging several social constituents (e.g., work in sociology and social psychology—Goffman, 1959, Tajfel, 1981 and Tajfel and Turner, 1979; in organizational identity—Gioia et al., 2000, Hatch and Schultz, 2004 and Brown et al., 2006; in corporate identity—Handelman, 2006); (3) Emerging research streams in marketing, such as the new service-dominant logic (Vargo & Lusch, 2004) and consumer culture theory (Arnould and Thompson, 2005, Brown et al., 2003, Grayson and Martinec, 2004, Holt, 2004 and Schau and Gilly, 2003) provide further support for the importance of co-creation and consumer experiences (Payne et al., 2009, Prahalad, 2004 and Kelly and Lawlor, 2010).
Drawing on multiple areas of research, this paper attempts to clarify what brand identity is and introduces a perspective for studying brand identity that acknowledges the increasingly dynamic market environment and the rising role of the consumer as a co-creator of brands. The authors suggest that brand identity management ought to be a dynamic process and, consequently, that managers need to reshape brand identity over time according to environmental changes and inputs from other social constituents (e.g., consumers).
Drawing on multiple streams of research, this paper seeks to clarify and rekindle the notion of brand identity and its management in an increasingly complex market context. By relying on a broad spectrum of literature (e.g., sociology, strategy), the study supports that brand identity is a dynamic process developing over time through mutually influencing inputs from brand managers and other social constituents (e.g., consumers). The dynamic aspect of brand identity entails being flexible to contextual changes while preserving a stable sense of self. Such a perspective leads to the needed consistency in identity management and presentations.
With this view of brand identity, the study sheds light on a recurring topic in the branding literature: the connection between market environment dynamics and brand identity stability and durability. Indeed, if the environment is unstable and unpredictable, should the brand identity remain fixed over time, to sustain long lasting references for the consumers, or, on the contrary, should the brand identity be flexible and adaptive? The tentative answer to this question lies in the meaning of the enduring identity attribute. To be enduring, the brand identity ought to be dynamic and flexible so that brand and consumers' faces are supported within the changing environment.
From a managerial perspective, this paper proposes a brand identity framework entailing the following dimensions: brand identity, brand face, consumers' face, encounters and contextual factors (e.g., competitors). The framework specifies how these dimensions relate to each other and may assist brand managers in developing brand identity as a function of integration with consumers, thereby optimizing their marketing and communication strategies in an increasingly dynamic environment.
